10 Comments

>>Captain Drake lay prone over her table

I'm still trying to figure out what this describes.

Expand full comment

So, I was a bit disappointed. I had hoped to hear more about the *changes* that future tech would bring to light infantry. I would be willing to argue that, just like the various pardigm shifts that light infantry has gone through in the past, there will be future changes as well that will make things look very different.

A fun thing to explore. I do some of it in one my stories, altho my focus isn't that much on the military tactics.

Expand full comment

Sorry to disappoint.

I described many changes, but they are subtle. The practitioners for whom the story was originally written spotted the changes but let me make them a little more explicit. 1) The thermal technology enhanced their ability to conduct reconnaissance. 2) The discussion about the drone presented the question over how it should be employed, given its limitations. 3) The company commander is briefing her subordinates on an electronic tablet. 4) The robotic machine guns changed the way that a support-by-fire positions are established. 5) Night vision allowed for easier non-verbal signaling at night. 6) Enemy countermeasures rendered electronic artillery fuses obsolete.

The purpose of this story was to demonstrate the likely continuities of the essence warfare in the future, despite the technological changes. Although not as sexy, looking for continuities between the present and the future is more realistic. The soldiers who fought in WWI over 100 years ago would find a lot more in common with the Russians and Ukrainians today than they would find differences. Today, weapons are more deadly, and sanitation tends to be better, but what was likely to kill you in large scale combat in 1917 is just as likely to kill you in large scale combat in 2023: artillery. The similarities between past, present, and future are even more striking when you look at counterinsurgencies. Max Boot points out the continuities brilliantly in his book "invisible armies."

Thanks for reading and commenting.

Expand full comment

Oh, it's the kind of thing I like to explore.

The whole 'more similarities than differences' thing though... my point is and was that they would find some things that were paradigm shifting. You can particuarly see this in the transition from standing in line and shooting, to being in trenches, to being in foxholes. I propose some things that I think might be paradigm shifting... such as routine emp use on the battlefield. I have a fun idea for the use of auto mortars, too :)

Expand full comment

"You can particuarly see this in the transition from standing in line and shooting, to being in trenches, to being in foxholes." I am not a historian, but I think this rather blunt description of paradigm shifts misses some crucial truths about large scale conflict. Case in point: they are fighting in trenches in Ukraine, today. In the 1950s we saw waves of Chinese soldiers attacking like it was Pickett's charge, although less orderly. If 20 years from now we see massed formations of men slamming into each other, I will be 0% surprised. Auto mortars sound cool, though.

Expand full comment

Or maybe we can work on the auto mortars for one of your stories :) I think I have some cool tech :)

Expand full comment

Well, I would be willing to go long form on this. The fact that you can see X happen years after X was outdated implies, to my mind, not a military issue but a cultural and economic one. I remember, years ago, reading a sci-fi story where two aliens both thought they were winning a conflict because the one side was looking at casualties and the other side at equipment.

So in Ukraine right now I haven't studied it much, but I would be willing to guess that what has happened is that we have *returned* to trenches, not stayed in them. That, for example, helicopter and drone combat, to name a couple of issues, has destroyed some of the kind of movement tactics that we were into late in WWII.

I read a sci-fi book that had colonies and the like. And the culture on the spaceships was remiscient of Napoleon era sailing ships. Because of the long travel times to the colonies.

So you can go from looking like A to B back to looking like A... because some new weapon or technology could take you back there. Aircraft carriers might be made obsolete by drone and missile ships, thus it would like like we were going back to battleship and cruiser days!

But let's face it, one squad with modern high powered rifles could take on any napoleon era ship... killing everyone on the deck from outside of cannon range. Leaving aside indirect fire cannons and missiles and drones. One thing I hated about the movie 'The Final Countdown'... we never got to see a conflict.

Maybe we can get togher and write sometime :)

Expand full comment

“So you can go from looking like A to B back to looking like A... because some new weapon or technology could take you back there.”

I congratulate you on abandoning your original incorrect argument and making a brand new argument which is virtually indistinguishable from my own. 🤣🤣🤣

We haven’t fought against a near-peer opponent since Korea. The vignette here bears no resemblance to the way American infantry has fought in combat for many years. It is much more reminiscent of a WWII style conflict than Vietnam, the Gulf War, or the GWOT.

Expand full comment

But, of course, there was ‘b’. And’b’ was interesting:)

Expand full comment

I was a little late in catching ip on my reading and the poll closed, but I’d love to read more about Cpt. Drake. My heart was racing. 😂

Expand full comment