1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar




big guns

Home Forums Research Law and Politics big guns

This topic contains 16 replies, has 11 voices, and was last updated by Avatar of Pastor_Jason Pastor_Jason 3 years, 11 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 17 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1130
    Avatar of greyraven_r
    greyraven_r
    Participant

    I’ve noticed alot of due concern over the ability of a seastead to return “big guns” on a threatening vessel or nation.

    I’ve read, with much amusement, the assumtions that many sea steads will be equiped with rockets, missles, and anti-ship/aircraft guns. This generally will NOT be the case, these weapons systems are typically expensive, difficult to aquire (functioning models), and draw unwanted scrutiny from many nations.

    The most likely “big guns” of sea steads will be computer hackers, microwave/radar/sonar/laser jamming equipment, and E.M. pulse generators. These weapons systems will typically be affordable and aquirable by sea steads. Most modern militaries will be sufficiently vulnerable these counter measures to ensure the reasonible defendability of a sea stead.

    A corp of expert computer hackers can cause enough hardship to all aspects of most modern nations, to strongly encourage a cease-fire by the aggresor. How many times in recent history has the U.S.A. or E.U. been nearly crippled in a critical capacity by a lone hacker or virus writter? Many hackers work for free or cheap, some for the thrill of the hunt.

    A small battery of microwave/radar/sonar/laser jamming equipment, and E.M. pulse generators can more effectively neutralize an agressive ship or plane more readily than by the limited supply and range of surplus or black market rockets, missles, and anti-ship/aircraft guns that a sea stead might aquire. These weapons systems could be produced onboard by crafty engineers and electronics professionals or hobbists.

    Fighting fire with fire is fine for those who can afford an equal amount of fire, but fighting fire with “water” is generally more effective and practical.

    #8936
    Avatar of i_is_j_smith
    i_is_j_smith
    Participant

    All the computer hackers in the world won’t stop that MOAB from landing in the middle of your seastead. All a cyber attack will do to a 1st world nation is piss them off.

    It has pretty much been agreed on here that there is nothing any seastead can do against the military of a major nation. The only threat we should be concerned about are pirates and thieves. And your microwave/radar/sonar/laser jamming system and EMP pulse weapons won’t stop their RPGs or AK-47s.

    Can you even jam sonar?

    I’ll bet you $5US that I could get a 2nd or 3rd generation anti-ship or anti-aircraft missle before you could get your hands on an EMP pulse generator. And I don’t mean a Marx generator that you build in your garage that can reach a few feet. I mean a weapon that could take out a large, sophisticated target at a significant range.

    Anyway, I don’t think anyone here is really thinking about getting their hands on long-range missles. Most of us are really just planning on small arms and maybe a few large caliber weapons to keep pirates at bay. We aren’t worried about stopping aircraft carriers.

    #8939
    Avatar of wohl1917
    wohl1917
    Participant

    I gotta’ agree with Smitty on this one. On a side note, if you remember a few years back the Navy was doing sonar tests that were killing and/or making the sea critters go nuts. The speculation was that it was a sonar jammer of some type.

    < http://ocr.wikia.com/wiki/Oceanic_Citizens_Republic_Wiki>

    Avatar of greyraven_r
    greyraven_r
    Participant

    If the first thing coming at you is a MOAB, what the hell were you doing in the first place? I’m talking about the likely first line of assult, which would be a frigate, or maybe light destroyer, even the planes (and by extension, missles) of a carrier are proven vulnerable to having their radar and subsystems jammed enough that you will buy negotiation time.

    I still believe that a small corp of dedicated hackers could end run through “soft targets” which backdoor into harder targets, like satelite communications and survelance…that could effectively disrupt alot of government activity including military response capabilities. And if it’s being used defensively then you’ve already pissed them off some other way.

    Admittedly effective E.M. pulse generators may be actually require more than Radio Shack, but they could be made effectively enough to disrupt certain critical systems on ships and missles.

    If the complete blindness of aggressive ships/subs/planes/missles/drones and likely disruption of their secondary systems isn’t desirable to someone under attack, then I would agree that microwave/radar/sonar/laser jamming equipment would not be usefull.

    My point is (and rebels, insurrgents, and terrorist the world over back me up) that under threat of superior force, an asymetrical warfront develops, unconventional tatics and weapons can be equalizers in asymetrical warfare.

    In war and battle, no outcome is predetermined, and any effective countermeasure can turn the tide.

    And except, maybe for hackers, all of these tools would be quite effective against pirates, it’s quite plausible that microwave jammers could kill engine electricals beyond the range of AK47s and RPGs.

    “When I look into the abyss it stares back at me, but not as the cold
    dark beast you perceive it to be.
    When I am gazed upon by the abyss I see the eyes of a mother, a lover, an old friend.
    When

    #9012
    Avatar of lonewolf1221
    lonewolf1221
    Participant

    im not sure about the techy weapons u mention, the emp generator is the one that jumps out at me as being hardest to deal make cheaply etc, however i think most people that are up for this whole idea are assuming a basic defences capability of small arms and whatever happens to be laying around. IF the stead was for some reason attacked by pirates everyone on the stead would fight coz they would be fighting for there lives homes and loved ones.

    And having big mounted guns [ if you could even get them] kind of sends out the wrong message, right? Seasteading is about new frontiers, working with people to achieve a goal, peace and political experimentation, how do big mounted weapons fit in with such ideals?

    also, why would a large nation attack you in the first place??

    however if you COULD get weapons like EMP generators and guidance system jammers and people had their own personal weapons then i think the stead would be pretty well defended. + Weapons like EMP generators and guidance system jammers are defensive they can’t be used in an offensive manner, i think that’s more fitting with the ideals of the project.

    #9131
    Avatar of J.L.-Frusha
    J.L.-Frusha
    Participant

    Found this. It’s reasonably accurate in describing both EMP bombs and methods to protect electronics against them.

    http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread59555/pg1

    On DC power suppls and equipment, supercapacitors and shielded equipment should be easy enough to hook-up, for protection. Treat it like a lightning-strike…

    #9141
    Avatar of Gentry
    Gentry
    Participant

    Easy lads. Let’s not waste our time with fiction.

    If a multi-billion dollar navy hasn’t been able to develop and weaponise this technology, don’t expect a rag-tag bunch of underfunded amatures to be able to either.

    Lets face reality, we’re not going to have armed seasteads for a multitude of glaringly obvious reasons; probably in our life time. A few small arms is a possibility. I know it’s difficult for us more rough and ready pioneering types to accept.

    #9154
    Avatar of J.L.-Frusha
    J.L.-Frusha
    Participant

    Gentry wrote:

    Easy lads. Let’s not waste our time with fiction.

    An armed response will be necessary. It’ll be a remote, unobservable place. That puts it subject to any number of possible agressions.

    [/quote=Gentry]

    If a multi-billion dollar navy hasn’t been able to develop and weaponise this technology, don’t expect a rag-tag bunch of underfunded amatures to be able to either.

    [/quote]

    Once stuff like e-bombs hit the news, the military is under pressure to upgrade. Look at reactive armor for vehicles. In the mid ’80s, it was an idea, now it’s a battlefield reality. Same with Kevlar armor, Ceramic armor and numerous other things. E-bombs, unguided rockets, torpedoes, etc. are a lot easier to make than you think.

    Gentry wrote:

    Lets face reality, we’re not going to have armed seasteads for a multitude of glaringly obvious reasons; probably in our life time. A few small arms is a possibility. I know it’s difficult for us more rough and ready pioneering types to accept.

    It isn’t likely that Seasteads will happen WITHOUT weapons. We’ve been covering this in ‘Military’ and ‘Piracy’ threads, as well as others. Think of the possible uses for clandestine manufacture. Drugs, explosives, toxins, bio-hazards, etc. Do you want a Seastead that does any of that, or one that can deffend against would-be thugs? Yes, some of us will be armed and ready. Oddly enough, we’ll buy and manufacture some of the very items we need, to fight off those that would use large-scale production, hidden at sea, by killing us and taking over our places.

    I may be ‘new’ here, but I’m able to read, add my little bit of knowledge and plan for the future.

    Later,

    J.L..F.

    If you can’t swim with the big fish, stick to the reef

    #9156
    Avatar of Gentry
    Gentry
    Participant

    J.L.Frusha wrote:

    It isn’t likely that Seasteads will happen WITHOUT weapons. We’ve been covering this in ‘Military’ and ‘Piracy’ threads, as well as others. Think of the possible uses for clandestine manufacture. Drugs, explosives, toxins, bio-hazards, etc. Do you want a Seastead that does any of that, or one that can deffend against would-be thugs? Yes, some of us will be armed and ready. Oddly enough, we’ll buy and manufacture some of the very items we need, to fight off those that would use large-scale production, hidden at sea, by killing us and taking over our places.

    I’m sorry, but they don’t want our bases like aliens won’t want our water. Why would they?

    There is a need for protection I know. But protection does not come in the form of $5000 cruise-missiles that can’t hit a football field 10kms away, or carry a payload over a bag of suger. Nor silkworm missiles, that have only ever sank one destroyer after 4 direct hits in their entire 50 years of history. We should concentrate on continuing to develop seasteading technology, not naval technology.

    Having, or trying to have items such as these just turns us into criminals in the eyes of most nations.

    #9164
    Avatar of J.L.-Frusha
    J.L.-Frusha
    Participant

    It’s not a matter of building “Our” Naval forces( I assume that’s your architectures support vehicles), before getting developed. It’s about deffending ourselves. If you have a prepared deffensive posture, you may never need it. If you go out there and DON’T have it, you cannot use what you do not have, when the need arises and it will, simply because they will learn from your lack of response, that you are easy prey.

    My place will be prepared. If you’re my neighbor, when it happens, come on over, until they leave me alone, then head back to shore, with your tail between your legs.

    Noone is crying “Wolf” without there being evil in the world.

    I don’t think cruise missiles are a good deffense, however, I’m not affraid to make and use claymores against an assault. At least 3 of us are good-to-expert with firearms. I don’t expect to need a machinegun, when I know how to use a sniper-rifle. If I feel the need, I can always make an RPG or other RP munitions. You don’t need torpedoes, if you can sneak up close and set a charge on a hull, which I can…

    I also expect problems with the local wildlife. I’ll start with bang-sticks and rar-shot and go from there…

    Later,

    J.L..F.

    If you can’t swim with the big fish, stick to the reef

    #9165
    Avatar of libertariandoc
    libertariandoc
    Participant

    I agree: Instead of silkworms, get Exocets. Or Harpoons. They’re quite a bit better, and can hit a football field (any base you’d care to name) from 100′s of km distance

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    I won’t be wronged. I won’t be insulted. I won’t be laid a-hand on. I don’t do these things to other people, and I require the same from them.

    #10721
    Avatar of Jack
    Jack
    Participant

    there is more to this but forum wont let me post all in one go.

    #10720
    Avatar of Jack
    Jack
    Participant

    delete

    #10719
    Avatar of Jack
    Jack
    Participant

    Tried to make a psot here but teh spam guard ruined it this should be deleted

    #11648
    Avatar of DrMandible
    DrMandible
    Participant

    If a Navy is coming at a seastead, it needs to put its hands up and surrender. Nothing short of nuclear weapons would stop even a modestly sized navy from obliterating a seastead from miles away. The wild west cannot be recreated in modern times. The only recourse a seastead would, or should, have would be appealing to the international community.

    Seasteaders would need to actively negotiate with existing organizations like the UN and EU. Without their recognition, seasteading is hopeless because any state could take unilateral action against a seastead with no repercussions.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 17 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.



Posted on at

Categories:

Written by

Blog/Newsletter

Donate