Poul Anderson's Foreword to The Queen Of Air And Darkness... states that there is no faster than light space travel in this collection. In "Time Lag," the Chertkoians have an "agoric drive" which, like a hyperdrive, cannot be switched on too deep in a gravitational field. This drive apparently jumps to near light speed without having to accelerate. Thus, the fifteen light-years between Chertkoi and Vaynamo can be crossed in just over fifteen years which are only a few weeks aboard ship.
The agoric drive accounts for both the title and the dates. (See the above link.) Thus, as in Poul Anderson's Starfarers, a faster means of interstellar travel is introduced without resorting to FTL and this in turn initiates an inter-generational narrative.
13 comments:
That was a fine story.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
I agree, "Time Lag" is an esp. fine story by Anderson.
I've been thinking the Chertkoians blundered in the means they chose for conquering Vaynamo. Instead of just smashing up the planet and then leaving, the First Expedition should have stayed, even it wasn't strong enough to crush all resistance and occupy the planet, it was probably strong enough to smash Vaynamoan attempts at rebuilding. And to keep on smashing such attempts till the Second Expedition arrived to reinforce the First and begin conquest of the planet.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
You sure know how to conquer a planet.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Ha, thanks! I was trying to think like a realistic, hard headed soldier or strategist confronted with a problem. After all, the First Expedition only needed to send a few ships back to Chertkoi, with the rest based in Vaynamo's solar system, using the resources found on it's moons and asteroids for resupplying and sustenance. Heck, the Chertkoians might even have built one if those O'Neill style habitats Jim advocates!
That touches on one of the mistakes Putin made with his war on Ukraine, not paying enough attention to LOGISTICS. He was thinking like the ex-KGB goon he used to be, not like a hard headed professional soldier.
Ad astra! Sean
Never give an opponent time to adapt and think up counters to your methods.
This was a commonplace as far back as Ancient Greece -- one of Alcman's songs for Sparta said "fight not with the same foe for too long".
Sean: his basic mistake was listening to faulty intelligence because it matched his preconceptions -- not the first leader to do that by any means.
That led him to organize his forces for a quick decapitation strike followed by an occupation, not prolonged high-intensity combat. He also underestimated the West's response, both on sanctions and aid to the Ukrainians in weapons and supplies.
It's all very well to plan for a quick victory, but you should also have prepared fallback plans in case things don't go well.
"No plan of battle survives the first contact with the enemy's main force," to quote von Molkte the Elder. Hence his other saying, "Planning is everything; a specific plan is nothing."
Or to put it in short form: very few military operations have ever failed because -too much- force was used.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
And Putin's long build up to his invasion of Ukraine gave the Intelligent services and General Staff in Kyiv time to estimate how much Moscow was committing and to decide a head to head set piece battle was not the way to go.
Meaning Putin should have planned for a decapitation strike using OVERWHELMING force, rather than just the fairly minimal forces he started with. I agree, have a back up plan to fall back on if/when the first one fails.
Your comments here clarifies what I've been seeing in the news and other media outlets. Lots of praise for the courage shown by the Ukrainians (quite rightly), but I've not seen commentary along the lines you gave here.
Ad astra! Sean
Praise and support for the Ukrainian people.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
Another thought I had was Putin's war on Ukraine reminded me of how the USSR attacked Finland in 1939. Like Putin, Stalin seems to have thought his invasion would quickly succeed--except the Soviets had grossly underestimated both the preparations the Finns had made for war and how DETERMINEDLY they would fight the USSR. And like the current war in Ukraine, the Finns were widely admired for how they fought back. And if it had not been for the difficulties caused by the war with Germany, the UK and France might have sent help to Finland.
Finland fought so hard and well that by 1940 Stalin decided to settle for territorial concessions from Helsinki, rather than take over the entire country. Similarly, one "off ramp" for Putin might be for Ukraine to make territorial concessions to Russia and agree not to join NATO or the EU.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean: also, Putin believed his own propaganda about how the Russian army had been reformed and modernized.
What actually seems to have happened was that a lot of the money supposedly spent on that was stolen, and reports were fabricated.
The Russian forces in Ukraine have performed utterly badly; incompetent, bad planning, bad training, low morale, no good NCO's, etc.
This was a horrible shock to their ruler.
Call it "autocrat's disease" -- nobody tells you the truth, either out of greed or fear of your reaction.
The Ukrainians, by contrast, though they still have corruption problems, actually spent their military money on their military, and the military worked hard at improving. With the help of a lot of Western training missions (UK, US, Canada), but it was Ukrainian sweat that took advantage of that.
Sean: also, Putin didn't -have- overwhelming strength to deploy.
The Russian army (not counting the navy, Strategic Rocket Forces, etc.) has about 170 Battalion Tactical Groups (BTG's), roughly 600-800 men ach.
They committed 120 of those in the initial attack on Ukraine; call it 120,000 combat troops plus support elements.
And they've lost 40K of those, in killed, seriously wounded, prisoners and deserters.
They've sent some more of the BTG's to Ukraine, but they just don't have many more.
And their reserve system is crap. Putin publicly promised he wouldn't send conscripts to Ukraine, only 'contract soldiers'; that was a lie, but a significant one.
Ukraine, OTOH, has effective reserve units (now coming online after callup and retraining) and has mobilized a huge popular militia and over 22,000 foreign volunteers.
Don't believe your own propaganda...
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
Your comments here are fascinating, and they help to make sense of what I've been seeing or reading in the media, sources most of which I regard with distrust.
What you said about how corruption, incompetence, bad morale, etc., explains why the Russian army has performed so badly makes me think Ukraine could WIN this war, because Putin might not be able to force the kind of "moderate" defeat Stalin inflicted on Finland. Unless Putin chooses to use chemical weapons and tactical nukes.
I would not be surprised if the corruption and bungling exposed by the war are causing heads to roll in Russia! The problem with being sycophantic to a tyrant is having your lies exposed and then facing the wrath of the despot. The most likely results would be either a purge of sycophantic incompetents or overthrow of the dictator.
Ad astra! Sean
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
I forgot to add that my reading of Solzhenitsyn's MARCH 1917 has been making me think over and over how much BETTER the front line troops of the Tsarist Army was from the army Putin commands. After all, it wasn't the elite of the Tsarist army which mutinied--it was the reservist units being trained in Petrograd which started the catastrophe of the March Revolution.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment