Tuesday, 16 January 2024

Five Characters On Ythri

"Wings of Victory."

One of Nicholas van Rijn's trade pioneer crews comprises one Master Merchant of the Polesotechnic League, one xenologist and one planetographer, of different species. Before the Commonwealth/League period, a ship of the Grand Survey had a larger, human-only crew. The Olga has a Captain, a xenologist, a planetographer, pilots and gunners for landing craft and no doubt many others.

Planetographer Maeve Downey, named not in the text of the story but later by Hloch, recounts her conversation with Xenologist Vaughn Webner before the landing party of Webner, Pilot Aram Turekian and Gunner Yukiko Sachansky descends to the surface of Ythri. Webner wonders how the Ythrians maintain a civilization with only local dirt roads and water transport. He does not yet know that the Ythrians fly and initially resists this idea by arguing that, in terrestroid conditions, any organism capable of flight has to have too low a body weight for intelligence.

Another planet discovered by the Olga is provisionally named after Captain Gray. Later, when the planet has been renamed Avalon, "Gray" becomes the name of an Avalonian city. Thus, Captain Gray, although he is merely referred to in this story, has an indirect impact on later history. None of these five characters, Downey, Weber, Turekian, Sachansky or Gray, appears again. Strong continuing characters emerge not immediately but gradually. By the end of Volume I, we have seen Adzel once, David Falkayn twice and Nicholas van Rijn four times and Falkayn has entered van Rijn's employment but has not yet met either Adzel or van Rijn.

Captain Gray prefers women as gunners because he thinks that they are better watchers and waiters and less likely to open fire. During the Northern Irish Troubles, a woman emerged from a toy shop holding a toy gun which she pointed at a patrolling British soldier. He pointed his real gun at her. She fainted and was carried away. The soldier acted correctly. Apparently under attack, he pointed his gun but did not open fire and immediately saw that this was unnecessary.

3 comments:

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

You seemed a bit puzzled in your first paragraph, but the solution seems plain, the Grand Survey occurred very soon after the invention of the FTL hyperdrive. The very first FTL ships would have only human crews. Time would be required before humans and non-humans knew each other well enough to travel safely to gether.

Good, that soldier was experienced and trained well enough to see he did not need to immediately open fire. But the woman with the toy gun behaved foolishly.

Ad astra! Sean

S.M. Stirling said...

Well, that's a good response in a 'civil unrest' situation.

In ongoing intensive combat, you generally shoot first at the slightest thing that indicates a threat, because otherwise you're going to die fairly soon.

Movement at a window may well be someone about to drop a grenade at your feet, for example.

If it's just some neighborhood person checking the street... well, so sad, too bad, c'est la guerre.

There are only split seconds to respond.

That's why soldiers these days are trained to look for things like movement, or "gun-like" outlines and take cover and/or shoot instantly, by conditioned reflex.

It's also why, after WWII, soldiers were taken off shooting at fixed targets (the bull's-eye type) in training after the most basic instruction aimed mostly at gun-safety and instead got 'pop up' targets with human outlines at unpredictable distances and places.

That increased the effectiveness of return fire out of all recognition, and it also drastically increased the percentage of soldiers who shot at all, which in WWII was rather low.

The training establishes a conditioned reflex: motion + human outline = aim and snap-shoot.

You don't really 'see' the person you're shooting at in the ordinary sense of 'see'.

You perceive a threat and respond as you've been drilled to do.

One of my characters in TO TURN THE TIDE is at a battle where he's introduced bomb-throwing catapults and other distance weapons.

He notes that you have to rely on conditioned reflex, and the reflex the other side has is to keep dense formations.

On a battlefield dominated by muscle-powered impact weapons, that's perfectly rational... but suddenly it isn't, and it isn't easy to change reflexes. When you're under stress and feeling fear, you fall back on what you've been drilled to do.

Intermediate situations can be hard that way.

In the film BARRY LINDON, there's an excellent scene (very historically accurate)_ where British and French infantry are facing off in the early 18th century; it's shown from both perspectives.

The French are waiting and the British attacking. The British advance in line formations with about two feet between soldiers, and the French await them standing.

They have to; the muskets everyone's using can't be reloaded unless you're standing.

The French open fire at about 150 yards, from ranks four deep.

From the French perspective, all you see is this line of red-coated dots approaching.

From the British perspective, you see a white-coated mass... and then the bullets come. Men die or go down screaming.

The rest close ranks and keep coming at the same pace.

They have to; the muskets are at maximum effectiveness at ranges of less than 100 yards.

So they keep going, take their losses, and open fire by platoon volleys at about 90 yards.

That's devastatingly effective, and every musket is loaded and nearly all of them fire.

The British formation suffered a fairly heavy dribble of casualties through about 3 French volleys; but the massive one they deliver at close range is much more of a physical and psychological shock.

Later, that training became a drawback, because ranges and rates of fire increased to the point where dispersing and advancing in small groups from cover to cover is better. A really different training was necessary to get men to shoot effectively in those circumstances, and as I described above it needed a different training regime.

But at the time BARRY LINDON was set, that mechanical advance ignoring casualties and volley-fire "into the brown" was best.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Mr. Stirling!

Very fascinating! The clumsy, muzzle loading muskets used by all armies down to the US Civil War determined what tactics were practical in battles. I did wonder, in the example you cited, if it would have been better for the French to have waited till the British were closer before opening fire.

As for the "civil unrest" situation, I am sure tactics would have to be shaped by "movement/outline/snap shooting." With special forces units trying to root out terrorist/guerrilla cells?

Ad astra! Sean