I've given the ground forces (RRTs) a full-page treatment on my Universe site.
http://www.coldnorth.com/owen/game/s...rce/ground.htm
Whaddaya think? I'm not American, so I don't have a soft spot for Marines.
Printable View
I've given the ground forces (RRTs) a full-page treatment on my Universe site.
http://www.coldnorth.com/owen/game/s...rce/ground.htm
Whaddaya think? I'm not American, so I don't have a soft spot for Marines.
17 views and no replies?
I always thought of RRTs, Ground Forces, and Starfleet Security personnel as different but similar to Starfleet personnel. Their American Modern equivalents, would be SEALs, Marine Reserves, & Master-at-Arms sailors. For Commonwealth board members, I was thinking the modern equivalent would be SAS, Territorial Army, and Royal Navy Warfare Specialist (correct me if I am wrong).
SEAL/JSOC/SAS missions don't sound like the kind of thing Starfleet's directives would go in for, being at the very least in contravention of the Prime Directive.
It's possible Starfleet Security, as a suborganization, has members which are more mobile depending on their assignment—Eddington was there to guard the Defiant, and Primmins was there just for the Norkova. I could see them getting placed on mining colonies to act as sherriff or whatever, being under the authority of the colonial administrator rather than a local Starfleet commander.
In my world I like to keep things far, far simpler. And as such I do not like to be drawing parralels to an existing military unit for comparisson.
Thus IMO, The RRT and Starfleet Ground forces are the same thing. There is no Starfleet Marines (and Col. West has been edited out as 'Commander West', much as I notice he has been from current edit of the movie that I watched on TV last week).
So Starfleet personnel may find themselves assigned to a Starship, to Ground duty (on colony worlds or ambassadorial staff) or in the RRT 'Teams'. I suppose if I had to draw a parrallel, then yes the RRT are like the SEALS, dropped in to deal with an urgent matter that a Starship would be too much. (UK equivalent would be the SBS and SAS depending on field of operations), but these small teams and covert ops are few and far between (Or are they, the nature of covert ops being... well, covert).
RRT is also capable of fielding larger, far less covert, battlefield contingents, although this is a rare deployment as most engagements in the 23/24th century require more finnese and would perefer to avoid loosing a war to a starship in orbit firing a stun phaser blast that'll take out your whole army (Orbital bombardments tend to muck up battle plans).
So while the RRT can draw from standard Starfleet personnel the focus is on Security and Tactical and Command. The SCE has a group of Combat Engineers attached to the RRT as battlefield engineers, and Medics are also attached. (M.A.S.H. units tend to be Starfleet Medical rether than RRT). Sciences tend to be far less common on RRT duty outside of mission specialists.
In times of 'peace' the teams team to reduce in size by neccessity, and focus on training. Often a squad will be assigned to a sector starbase for speed of emergency deployment, while the major equipment is put into long term storage, amintenance and upgrade rotation.
(See, one of the massive problem I have with Starfleet ground forces and tanks and the like is that in an age of transporters and FTL starships, they seem massively redundant. In 'nor the battle to the strong' this is even addressed in the throwaway line about the Klingons shooting the Hoppers down. The Federation is presented as a society pushing for peace, and only engaging in warfare as a last resort. It seems to me that the really heavy equipment would be used so rarely that its in danger of being out-dated when its required - thinking specifically the UK and US armoured divisiuons in the 1930's where we only realised what was required AFTER the Blitzkreig swept across us... There I go NOT making tose real-world comparrisons again)
Yeah, anything that even resembled traditional armoured vehicles in Trek's day and age would be ridiculously unmanouverable in comparison. Hell, you might even replace them with self-transporting bunkers if you really need something that doesn't fly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Gurden
My problem has always been simply one of practicality. Today, military forces are used to capture ground, yes, but they don't just wander around aimlessly - they're there to capture a specific bit of real estate. A bunker. A hill. A fortress. A building. A government centre. A communications nexus...etc.
When you can just beam people in, the idea of having large formations of soft-bodied sapients wandering around a battlefield alive with phaser and disruptor fire seems just...well...silly. Especially when they can simply be precision-targeted from orbit.
To illustrate...
Let's assume it's the Dominion War. There is a Cardassian-held planet which Starfleet needs to capture. If it was George Lucas directing, a million troops would land and march across the terrain, shooting anything that moves.
More sensibly, however, just what does Starfleet need to capture? Communications centres are the most obvious. Power generation facilities. Industrial fabrication facilities. I'm sure there are plenty I've not thought of, but bear with me.
Starfleet arrives and engages the Cardassian ships around the planet. Assuming the SF ships are victorious, now what? All the objectives are surrounded by transporter jammers, so they can't just beam in. However, they can beam in nearby. Ten thousand troops to capture a single facility (power generators) isn't going to achieve anything except get a lot of people killed. But several small teams, equipped with their own jamming devices and high-tech methods of dispatching the Cardassian jammers (explosives, for example :) ) would work much better.
Once they've captured the power generators, the rest of the areas will fall with relatively little effort. The jammers will fail, and the ships only need beam out the defenders, straight into a detention cell (or camp, or whatever). Now they just have to stop Cardassian ships from repeating the process!
The key, I think, is orbital combat - if you control the orbital region, you have effectively won. Sure, small pockets of resistance could hold out in areas unplottable by transporters (kelbonite caves, anyone?), but by and large, if you've won the battle in space, you own the planet.
It might also be possible to use transporter buffers to establish transporter beachheads within the jamming zone. Enemy morale while under the threat of orbital annihilation probably also factors into the situation; Cardassians might negotiate surrender in a situation where Klingons or Jem'Hadar would fight to the death.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aldaron
While Aldaron makes valid points about winning the battle, whether its Star Trek or the real world, winning a battle/seizing a planet and keeping it under control for any appreciable time are two very different things.
Its certainly true in modern warfare, and in a moment I'll provide a Star Trek situation, but while technology wins battles holding whats been won requires ground troops to control. And even then the spirit of the conquered may make that victory pyrric.
Trek for instance: Cardassian occupation of Bajor.
OK, and while that is a valid Star Trek example, its also a failed occupation. And most importantly, How does that relate to Starfleet.Quote:
Originally Posted by K.G. Carlson
The UFP is most certainlt a Hearts and Minds kind of place. The Starfleet that we see on screen is most certainly not the kind of place to host an occupying force. I can envision a defending force and a covert strike force, but your example immediatly shows up exactly what startfleet is not...
Now we are in danger of repeating the same old pro/con arguement all over again.
But one thing I do agree on is that Star Trek is made up of parallels, events in the TV show may have held a sci-fi mirror to the real world. And in that there IS room for this kind of story. One could conceivably mirror current events in the Middle East with a Star Trek theme, up to and including a vastly unpopular and costly occupation/rebuild of a formerly hostile place.
These however are not entirely relevent to the subject in hand regarding Owens workup of the Rapid Response Teams
I just used the admittedly failed occupation of Bajor because it was a blatant example of a use of ground forces.
While Starfleet is focused on exploration, it does also perform a military role for the Federation. Exactly how much they may or may not parallel real historical examples is difficult to pin down, particularly canon examples. But whether its almost war in the TOS or the Dominion War on DS9, it could be implied that Starfleet might not have a million man army but some type of Ground Forces makes sense.
Not trying to make an argument, I just find this topic interesting.
Control of hostile territory, or at least planetary neutralization, would be required in a State of War that the Federation was in During the Dominion War and other wars it was involved in.
In all wars, a large part of who won a battle was who controlled the high ground and thus was able to keep the field of battle, i.e. control of real estate. With intersteller travel possible the high ground becomes the near space by hospiteable planetary bodies with arid land or other such resources.
This is why in the ground battles observed in DS9, aerial/space support was not a factor in those stories, and combat was around key points, such as the relay station where Nog loss his leg. Therefore a targetted strike is more likely by the Federation rather than a Cardassian or Klingon stike full invasion and planetary subjegation. If the Federation where to ever take over a planet, from another controlling body, rather than subjegating a population chances are the Federation would pay for a one way trip to a planet still in control of that other body, and those who wish to remain to be brought into the greater Federation society for the "love of root beer".
But back on the war discussions, outside of controlling key real estate, much as was done with the United States, Spain, and Britain (yes even the British Empire) control of Manila to effectively control the whole Philippine Islands in the 18th Century and previous centuries, there would be little need to maintain control of other areas except to ensure that departure and egress onto the planet was controlled thus neutralizing the planet from contributing economically or militarily to the efforts of the opposing force.
Ah, opinions... moving on.Quote:
One could conceivably mirror current events in the Middle East with a Star Trek theme, up to and including a vastly unpopular and costly occupation/rebuild of a formerly hostile place.
One thing though, to be able to maintain control of those key pieces of real estate, one probably wouldn't maintain control with highly skilled crack forces used for infultration, neutralization, and initial control. Rather, a security force that specializes in ground based operations maybe called upon that normally remain dormant during times of peace.
That would be an interesting setting for an episode during the Dominion War: a displaced persons camp within the Federation.Quote:
Originally Posted by JALU3
Of course, one wonders when the Federation is ever really in a 'time of peace.' There were border wars with the Cardassians up until five years before the Dominion War, surely somewhere ground forces would be highly occupied. The Tholian and Tzenkethi wars happened almost at the same time. The Klingon border might have been problematic up until 2344, requiring at least a small presence. Then there's all those species every narrator makes up for their own games, which probably involve numerous crises and whatever... if there is a discrete ground forces section within Starfleet, I expect it's always busy somewhere.Quote:
Rather, a security force that specializes in ground based operations maybe called upon that normally remain dormant during times of peace.
That said, we also have to remember that 24th century societies have access to training devices modern militaries can only dream of: the Holodeck. Being able to semi-accurately reproduce the environment and possible ramifications has got to expand the flexibility of 'standard' Starfleet crewmembers to a much greater degree than we can do today, enough that I maintain the position that Starfleet ground forces would likely be transferred from other postings (ships, bases, et cetera) as needed, especially since they'd have to interface with all the same standard technologies and situations Starfleet crewmembers on ships and away teams would need to.
Imagine the Federation Refugees of those citizens from the invaded worlds of those who were able to escape, that would be an interesting scenario. How is that handled? Does the Federation have systems in place to assist mass movement of people like that?
For those non-federation sentient beings on worlds militarily/economically neutralized by a Federation presence above them, how would that be? Such as a held Cardassian World during the Dominion War.
Given the vastness of the Federation, I would think it is rare that there isn't some border conflict somewhere. However, until the Dominion War the Federation, in the primary quantum universe has not experienced a full scale mobilization conflict. I imagine it would be like SFOR/KFOR/IFOR in that a NG/AR unit would be activated and mobilized for a rotation, and then demobilized, and inactivated after being relieved by another unit.