Contemporary 24th Century Mars: Glassed surface?

[RPC]

An IRC conversation came up where many discussed the effects of the Styrtis bombing on Mars.
Several interesting points and ambiguities have been pointed out, such as:
Ambiguities:
1. We do not know the extent of the bombing. Was it just to destroy the Ares habitants on Mars or the surface of Mars in general?
2. How powerful were the explosions in destroying the Ares habitats? Did the habitats have shields that resisted the nukes, and required bombs to destroy the whole area the habitat rested on instead to instigate collateral damage?
3. Were the colonies visible from space? Are their remains?
4. Is Mars still radioactive when the Pilgrim leaves for the Core? Has the CW decontaminated it, or even reinhabitated Mars?
5. "What were the nukes supposed to do? Were they tactical[targeting biological breakdown] or strategic[causing structural breakdown]?"
Same questions go for the bombing of Earth by the Ares.

[Song]

Well, the area around the blast sites on un-terraformed surface areas, would probably be blackened, or a dullish red/black or orange/black, since the fireballs would create an iron-rich equivalent to Trinitite...the redder/orange shades would be the dust settling down while the surface was still molten. if the dust is thick enough, it might look like regular surface...except for cratering, possibly, if the weapons detonated close to/at the surface. of course, we don't know how much of mars was left as it is now...if it was extensively terraformed, the effects would be very different....and you'd see burnt forest remnants, if forest had been established.

So, given the time that's passed since the bombing, unless the entire surface (or a large proportion of it) got wiped and glazed...the effects might not be the most obvious thing ever, visually. Radiologically would be another story...there'd still be low-medium level radiation...possibly high level if cobalt bombs were used. (Cobalt bombs are a modified thermonuke, deisgned to wipe out life over a large area, for a long time. ALL life..not just people. They've never even been test-detonated, but they work in theory.)




Personally....I think the syrtis would have gone for a few hundred kilotons per nuke. It's all you need to kill a city, or a military target, and it lets you have more bombs. Since they were trying to kill everyone, a lot of smaller bombs, possibly using enhanced-radiation weapons, would have made more sense. In the case of the CW retaliatory bombing...I think it's strongly implied they tried for a scorched earth (well....mars) policy...to completely destroy their enemies in every possible way. So they may have gone for medium-sized nukes aimed at individual habitats trying to achieve a surrender...or they might have just piled together as much fissile material as they could scrape up, built it into multi-megaton warheads and rained them down until nothing moved.


(

[Atarlost]

The thing about Mars is that there's no ecosystem. A good sized rock is as good as Tzar Bomba against a dome city. Even if terraforming is well along there won't be much threat from the rural population. Kill the cities and they die when they run out of spare parts they can't fabricate or fabricator feedstock if they don't run out of something else critical first.

You can set up a self sustaining technology base from very little, but it relies on having materials grow on trees. Mars is going to suffer from a decided lack of trees. It also relies on skills that are no longer common. The Syrtis Conclave is probably going to also suffer from a decided lack of SCA members and traditional blacksmiths.

[george moromisato]

Another question: how big was the Syrtis population on Mars at the time?

From the founding of the Syrtis colony on Mars (2118) to the start of the war (2230) was about 112 years.

For comparison, the American Colonies grew from a few thousand people in 1630 to around 1 million 1740. And that was with very little technology (and no anti-biotics). The Syrtis colony had the advantage of high-tech health care plus cloning. Perhaps their population reached into the tens of millions; somewhere between the size of today's Greece (11 million) and Poland (38 million). [Personally I think the lower end is better.]

That implies that they had multiple large cities plus many rural areas (since they had a lot of room). The cities and industrial centers would certainly have been attacked from orbit. Many of the missiles would have been intercepted by ground defenses, but only one has the get through to obliterate a city. Probably all major cities were destroyed; the rural areas probably survived with little damage, but may not have been able to live without the cities and other technological infrastructure.

[One other note: The first Martian colony was in 2067, by Asian Pacific Directorate. They started the process of terraforming, though they probably didn't get far enough by the time the Syrtis attacked in 2230. Syrtis civilization contributed to the terraforming, but also met it half-way by adapting themselves to the environment. It is unlikely that humans would have been able to survive unaided on the surface, but the Syrtis probably could by 2230.]

[Belxjander]

if this is 24th Century then Mars may be partially Terraformed (thus providing a thicker atmosphere),
and any nuclear devices would be more tactical in nature (owing to the resources present).

This line of reasoning would indicate that there would be no glassing of Mars surface,
but there would be a radiation time before recolonization would occur.

When would Mars be bombarded and what half-life development would occur in the Commonwealth?
possibly the first strike would leave a strategic glassing somewhere around Mons Olympus,
and this would be the only strike with any glassing and visibility from space.

This is only once I had given this some thoughts...

as the contemporary (20th century) militaries are vying for replacement of the higher yield strategic
nuclear arsenals with lower requirement *tactical* weapons.

With the considerations of Georges post about the Syrtans colonization...
partial terraformation is a definite, along with major biological reprogramming

I would think Earth's response would be a strategic/tactical mix focused more on a tactical short but effective sterilization usage of warheads... so minimal glazing but a LOT of tactical bombardement

Think of a red moonscape of craters with no real change of coloration but definitely a lot of darker
areas where any biological forms *were* until the bombardments began raining...

[Atarlost]

Radiation really isn't that bad. Hiroshima and Nagasaki did not go uninhabited for longer than it took to rebuild.

Frankly, though, unless George has explicitly stated nuclear bombardment was used against Mars it probably wasn't, and if he has he may change his mind. Any drive capable of getting a human to the Kuiper stargate in a reasonable timeframe is capable of turning a small asteroid into a city killer that's a lot harder to defend against than an equivalent nuke. A kinetic bolide can't be turned into a dud by damaging its ignition system.

The only reasons for a spacegoing civilization to use nukes on planetary targets are to deploy neutron bombs to kill with minimal disruption to infrastructure, to use high altitude EMP effects to disrupt communications, or to deploy cobalt bombs to render a target uninhabitable long term. Any of those reasons might apply to the Syrtis attack on Earth, but not so much to the retaliation. If you just want blam kinetics are just more reliable and harder to defend against.

[shanejfilomena]

The thing about Mars is that there's no ecosystem. A good sized rock is as good as Tzar Bomba against a dome city. Even if terraforming is well along there won't be much threat from the rural population. Kill the cities and they die when they run out of spare parts they can't fabricate or fabricator feedstock if they don't run out of something else critical first.

You can set up a self sustaining technology base from very little, but it relies on having materials grow on trees. Mars is going to suffer from a decided lack of trees. It also relies on skills that are no longer common. The Syrtis Conclave is probably going to also suffer from a decided lack of SCA members and traditional blacksmiths.

Hinty. Hint: 100% plastic was developed on a FARM ( On The Hudson (River) , New York )
Not everything grows on trees: much of what you have around you came from Bacteria and silica and ore of one variety or another such a zinc, cadium, gold is actually bacteria , Iron , etc:

So it is the Mining colonies that the cities depend on, not so much the farms for technological power.
+++++++++++++
Radiation: in terms of weapons : The energy released from a nuclear weapon detonated in the troposphere can be divided into four basic categories:[1]

* Blast—40-50% of total energy
* Thermal radiation—30-50% of total energy
* Ionizing radiation—5% of total energy (more in a neutron bomb)
* Residual radiation—5-10% of total energy

However, depending on the design of the weapon and the environment in which it is detonated the energy distributed to these categories can be increased or decreased.

However, if your looking at it in terms of stripped atmosphere and tons of radiation coming at the planet surface : well, we KNOW the radiation levels on Mars is not so severe as to stop an Earth Machine from functioning so that logically leads to the availability of building resources to shield a population and regrow the culture ( provided the technology exist and there are healthy enough creatures to do the work : )

[george moromisato]

Frankly, though, unless George has explicitly stated nuclear bombardment was used against Mars it probably wasn't, and if he has he may change his mind. Any drive capable of getting a human to the Kuiper stargate in a reasonable timeframe is capable of turning a small asteroid into a city killer that's a lot harder to defend against than an equivalent nuke. A kinetic bolide can't be turned into a dud by damaging its ignition system.

I like this; but I can easily imagine that both methods were used. It might take longer to move an asteroid than to launch a nuke (or volley of nukes). And if they see the asteroid in motion then they would have time to thwart the plans.

Perhaps asteroid attack is best as a surprise attack. Maybe it was Earth that was first attacked by asteroids.

[Aury]

Given that the damage system in the transcendence universe already deviates from reality, (ie, particle weapons being lower than ion)... I'm not entirely sure that such an approach to determining how mars was destroyed would necessarily 'fit' the universe.

I went with nukes in TSB's background. Why? Because it fit the established universe. You don't see people hurling asteroids around at any stage of the game. (aside from me abusing asteroid ejecta)

[RPC]

Maybe it was Earth that was first attacked by asteroids.

Wouldn't Earth have just set their Star Wars program [/aka the ICX] to attack asteroids?
It would be the best surprise attack though; nobody would expect them to use something as non-conventional as an asteroid. Not only do they have to worry about the impact, but if they blow up the asteroid, dust would envelop the Earth's atmosphere and thus would generally wreck ecosystems.

[Amariithynar]

But why would they? Flinging asteroids around is like the ultimate scourge- If ANYONE uses them, then they are immediately seen as people to be feared and hated and, ultimately, wiped out as soon as possible. Sending an asteroid via heavy reactor drive into a planet's surface makes pretty much any inhabitable planet go Ice Age. That's a planet that can no longer realistically support much life period, let alone (unaugmented) human life. Not only that but a sufficiently hard/large asteroid impact could simply ruin the planet, period.

Take a look at Mass Effect for an example here; The Turians used that strategy in first contact and they're STILL working to repair the damages of it (as a government) for it, how many years later? Or the Batarian during Bring Down The Sky, who is classed as a Tier 1 Terrorist and as such is considered a threat to the very existance of the Council and its constituent races. The cretaceous asteroid that hit Earth was a mere 10 KM.

However... if you use small asteroids (1/2 KM-1 KM or so) that would not burn up in atmo BUT wouldn't be big enough to do any lasting serious damage to the planet as a whole, you could bombard the entire surface of a planet with them, focussing on populated areas, and as such decimate the inhabiting population and decimating their capability to respond to the attack or even to continue existing during the breakdown of communications nodes, while leaving the planet itself largely undisturbed, not irradiated, and ready to be reformed for re-colonization.

[Ttech]

I think the important fact is once it was nuked it was somewhat like Chernobyl (still inhabitable just not very well) or with the nukes somethine else happened?

[Song]

I suppose it depends on how advanced the CW ships were....and whether the Ringers (who i think had gone to the Belt by then, if not then then never mind) would let them take asteroids from their space. While asteroids are easily capable of seriously high explosive yields, and in theory cheaper...if you're running inefficient systems, and happen to have a lot of nukes around, it's probably easier to lob those instead of chasing rocks across the system, using a lot of fuel and taking ships away from the defense/offense against the martians. They're easier to impart the right velocity on as well, since asteroids usually won't be heading in a convenient direction.

Hell, you could probably take out most of the sensitive stuff (launch systems, domed structures, life support) just by packing a Dragon (the SpaceX capsule, not the sung warship) sized RV with tungston rods or darts. Even if they slow down to a mere Mach 1-3, you'll still go straight through a LOT of structures. They're used in war today from modified cluster-bombs....apply them to an orbital weapon, and you'd have something similar to a PK25, only more focused. And quite possibly white-hot as well....so they'd sometimes (not always, but sometimes) work a little like a shaped charge. Crack the dome or shell of the target, then shatter inside. In a way, far more efficient than a relativistic slug.

[Amariithynar]

Shrike: Er... i think you're thinking meteors. Asteroids are those things floating around in the Kuiper Belt and the asteroid belt right outside Mars' orbit.

Even asteroid bombardment especially on a low-grav (38% earth grav), thin-atmo planet like Mars (even if terraformed its core features restrict it to a lighter atmo and less grav than otherwise unless the planet was basically rebuilt) would leave long-lasting effects. Mars is composed mainly of the iron oxide dust covering the surface (why it is the "red planet"), and beneath that is mostly basalt....

Compressive Strength (MPa)

100-300

Tensile Strength (MPa)

10-30

Shear Strength (MPa)

20-60

Bulk Density (Mg/m3)

2.8-2.9

Porosity %

0.1-1.0

And if terraformed we can assume that proper 'soil' was laid down, probably to a depth of at least a half-dozen feet wherever agriculture would occur. The world would be useless without non-precious metals to sustain it (Mars is rich in silver, gold, and platinum, but most non-dust iron near Mars is asteroid-based) so only the major cities would need to be hit, not the agriculture sites. Thus there would be probably shallow craters from impact, with a kick-up of some debris as normal, but it'd settle much further and much sparser over Mars due to the lowered gravity- Much like if a nuke were exploded in earth atmo, the radioactive particles would rain down over a much wider area but would be much less dense, meaning that it would effectively either decay or disperse too far to irradiate much of anything. Thus, it'd be recolonizable again, but would take many years to get back into shape.

Note, this is regardless of asteroid usage or nuke usage. I think even the most angry gov't wouldn't nuke the crap out of a world spent decades in the building.

Also re: Asteroid usage, it would be feasible for the Syrtius to fling Hygeia at the Earth, as it is closest to the plane of the ecliptic, while we would most likely either use Vesta, which is also basaltic in origin, or Ceres, the dwarf planet in the asteroid belt.

[Song]

Shrike: Er... i think you're thinking meteors. Asteroids are those things floating around in the Kuiper Belt and the asteroid belt right outside Mars' orbit.

I'm well aware of what asteroids are. Meteors are objects entering an atmosphere and burning up....asteroids are big rocks in space. The belt is amazingly empty....send a probe through, and it's actually harder to get near an asteroid than it is to sail through without seeing anything. It's only dense in astronomical terms.....same with its proximity. As weapons, they're ideal. GETTING them, however..and then setting them up safely.....isn't so easy.

..Of course, there is one way you could kill mars as a fighting force using asteroids that wouldn't require a trip out to the Belt. Set up fusion, ion or plasma drives on Phobos and Deimos, stop their rotation, and de-orbit them into the planet, preferably simultaneously. It'd be hard to do, take a lot of defensive work and casualties and take more effort than nuking the place, but they're in decaying orbits, and are the closest thing of "KABOOOOOOOM!" size...and are small enough that while still suffering the same problem as asteroids in the Belt (momentum), you don't have the second problem (not going the right way)....and they're a lot lighter than, say, Luna. The proximity means more fuel used, which in war is a BAD thing...but the psychological effects of someone deorbiting your own moons onto your cites would be IMMENSE.

....I still don't think they did it, however. Although it MIGHT give an alternative reason why the Ares have ships named after those moons. But it's a neat enough impractical but awesome weapon.