Federation GROUND force vs USA Ground force

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



Hewhoknowsall
What if a 24th century Federation ground force came in contact with a modern USA ground force and they for some reason fought?

This is a very large plain with a few trees and rocks for cover.

Federation forces have typical composition.

USA forces have typical composition, ie infantry, tanks, etc.

Equal numbers

No element of surprise

No air support

Who would win?

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
What if a 24th century Federation ground force came in contact with a modern USA ground force and they for some reason fought?

This is a very large plain with a few trees and rocks for cover.

Federation forces have typical composition.

USA forces have typical composition, ie infantry, tanks, etc.

Equal numbers

No element of surprise

No air support

Who would win?

The federation.

Hewhoknowsall
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The federation.

because...

does the Federation even have tanks?

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
because...

does the Federation even have tanks?

Ali the Federation would have to do is a line of troops with phasers on wide stun. The US army would not even get a shoot throw their shields.

Hewhoknowsall
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Ali the Federation would have to do is a line of troops with phasers on wide stun. The US army would not even get a shoot throw their shields.

Really? How far is the range? Can it penetrate tank armor? Do the Federation troops have shields/armor capable of stopping artillery/tank rounds?

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
Really? How far is the range? Can it penetrate tank armor? Do the Federation troops have shields/armor capable of stopping artillery/tank rounds?

The federation can also do it from space.

Hewhoknowsall
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The federation can also do it from space.

seriously? did you read the thread title? I specifically capitalized the ground in federation ground force in order to avoid this.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
seriously? did you read the thread title? I specifically capitalized the ground in federation ground force in order to avoid this.


OK, but it would just be a matter of time. The federation can out maneuver the US. The federation can replicate their own supply were as the US has to have supply lines. The federation would have air superiority, while the US would not even get anything off the ground. The federation could block all satellite communication, while the US would not even know how to receive subspace communication, let alone block it.

Hewhoknowsall
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
OK, but it would just be a matter of time. The federation can out maneuver the US. The federation can replicate their own supply were as the US has to have supply lines. The federation would have air superiority, while the US would not even get anything off the ground. The federation could block all satellite communication, while the US would not even know how to receive subspace communication, let alone block it.

you are talking about a war. I am talking about a battle, just ground, no air support, no supply lines, just a battle

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
you are talking about a war. I am talking about a battle, just ground, no air support, no supply lines, just a battle
There is no such thing. The US army will not go into battle with out air support, supply lines or communications.

-Pr-
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
because...

does the Federation even have tanks?

they have craft called "hoppers" but they've only been referenced, and never seen on screen. of course, they have shuttlecraft too...

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
Really? How far is the range? Can it penetrate tank armor? Do the Federation troops have shields/armor capable of stopping artillery/tank rounds?

it can penetrate tank armour on medium settings. on full settings, entire battallions are getting vaporised.

Hewhoknowsall
Originally posted by -Pr-
they have craft called "hoppers" but they've only been referenced, and never seen on screen. of course, they have shuttlecraft too...



it can penetrate tank armour on medium settings. on full settings, entire battallions are getting vaporised.

Right, but no combat vehicles that have been used in the ST shows.

Where does it say this?

-Pr-
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
Right, but no combat vehicles that have been used in the ST shows.

Where does it say this?

about the hoppers or the phasers?

Hewhoknowsall
Originally posted by -Pr-
about the hoppers or the phasers?

phasers

-Pr-
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
phasers

from memory alpha:

Hewhoknowsall
Thanks.

That's neat, although I wonder why they don't use it more often. So if they get within range, they can defeat the US ground troops quite easily (although is there proof that it can destroy tanks?). However, do you know what its effective range is? That would matter alot in this fight.

-Pr-
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
Thanks.

That's neat, although I wonder why they don't use it more often. So if they get within range, they can defeat the US ground troops quite easily (although is there proof that it can destroy tanks?). However, do you know what its effective range is? That would matter alot in this fight.

if it can vaporise concrete, i doubt tank armour would be much of a problem.

they don't use it more often because it would make things too easy lol.

the range? hand phasers can hit at least a few hundred metres, based on the show itself. dunno if a range has ever been stated.

Acrosurge
This is a stomp in the Federations favor. With tricorders, Starfleet forces could disrupt the US army's communication and computer systems, rendering strategic movements impossible. They have forcefields (which could even be improvised from phasers in emergencies), transporters (to capture enemy officers), and singe-man photon grenade launchers that can clear an entire hillside with a single shot. As previously mentioned, they have phasers and phaser rifles that can quickly disintegrate armored personnel and vehicles over a wide area. They also have the TR-116 rifle that can scan through rock, armor, and bunkers, and can teleport a tritanium projectile directly into the target from kilometers away. The ultimate sniper weapon.

I can assure you that the US Army isn't going to function well with all communications and computer systems disrupted. Add to that the technological and firepower advantages of Starfleet, and you have a stomp.

Hewhoknowsall
Yes, so it's highly likely that Starfleet wins. Remember however, that USA has:

tanks
artillery
mortars
machine guns
gernades
soldiers that are very used to fighting on ground
shotguns

most of which for some reason the Federation doesn't have; I have yet to see a single tank.

Oh, and by "battle" I mean a small scale battle of at most a few divisions, not a large scale strategic war.

Acrosurge
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
Yes, so it's highly likely that Starfleet wins. Remember however, that USA has:

tanks
artillery
mortars
machine guns
gernades
soldiers that are very used to fighting on ground
shotguns

most of which for some reason the Federation doesn't have; I have yet to see a single tank.

Oh, and by "battle" I mean a small scale battle of at most a few divisions, not a large scale strategic war. So, in your scenario, you were picturing a few USGF divisions across a field from the Starfleet equivalent? Then they proceed to shoot at each other until one side wins?

Well, I'll break it down the way I see it:

Tanks: Starfleet doesn't use them because they are outdated. Shuttlecraft and fighters can perform the same role with superior mobility, defense, and firepower. Tanks really wouldn't be much of a threat due to a lack of protection against phasers (which could disintegrate the tanks with ease) and photon grenades (same effect as phasers only over a 100+ meter area.

Artillery: Again, phasers, phaser rifles, and photon grenades perform the same role as heavy artillery at a fraction of the size of the US Army's emplacements. Starfleet weapons also have far superior firepower (they can disintegrate unshielded material and uncouple multiple targets with a wide-setting blast). In addition, Starfleet has forcefields that can be deployed to protect against US artillery.

mortars-- see previous
machine guns-- see previous
grenades-- see previous

Soldiers that are very used to fighting on ground: Following the Dominion War, Starfleet personnel were very well acquainted with fighting ground wars against superior numbers and technology far beyond anything the US army has to offer. In addition, Starfleet has transporters that can teleport friendly soldiers to strategic battle locations, or simply remove enemy soldiers and equipment (the US army has no way to defend against this).

Shotguns: Phaser can instantly disintegrate single or multiple targets. A shotgun hardly compares.

Think of it this way. Its as if the modern US Army were fighting a Roman Legion from the 1st century. The Romans would fight with swords, spears, arrows, horses, metal armor, and chariots. The Romans would scoff at the US for not having any of these things. But you and I both know that such a battle would be a slaughter due to the superior technology of the US Army. Swords and spears are no match for modern firearms. Likewise, arrows would not be able to penetrate modern armor, nor even a single soldier's body armor.

Likewise, the technology of Starfleet (and tactics) would render the US Army obsolete.

Hewhoknowsall
You make good points, but:

This is only a ground battle. No air support or space support is allowed. Starfleet doesn't use tanks because they could just use fighters, but now in this case we're talking about a pure ground battle.

What is the range of a phaser? Artillery can strike from many kilometers away.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
You make good points, but:

This is only a ground battle. No air support or space support is allowed. Starfleet doesn't use tanks because they could just use fighters, but now in this case we're talking about a pure ground battle.

What is the range of a phaser? Artillery can strike from many kilometers away.

But artillery would just impact on the shields and do no damage.

Hewhoknowsall
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
But artillery would just impact on the shields and do no damage.

Do ground Federation troops use shields? I don't think so.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
Do ground Federation troops use shields? I don't think so.

Yes, they do. There was a next generation show were there was a storm on a planet (some kind of planet wide plasma storm). The people from the Enterprise used shield generators to hold the storm back while they evacuated the planet, and then they used the shields to protect themselves when they could not hold back the storm any longer.

Hewhoknowsall
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Yes, they do. There was a next generation show were there was a storm on a planet (some kind of planet wide plasma storm). The people from the Enterprise used shield generators to hold the storm back while they evacuated the planet, and then they used the shields to protect themselves when they could not hold back the storm any longer.

Please elaborate on the characteristics of that shield.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
Please elaborate on the characteristics of that shield.

Why? Have you ever watched the show? If shields in Star Trek can deflect antimatter explosions, then they can stop conventional weapons (to the US army today), including nuclear weapons.

All they need is power, and they have more then enough of that.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shields_(Star_Trek)

NinthCorona
Why is this a thread?

Hewhoknowsall
Sorry I took me so long to respond, but:

Now I don't remember Federation GROUND forces regularly using shields.

Originally posted by NinthCorona
Why is this a thread?

What do you mean?

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
Sorry I took me so long to respond, but:

Now I don't remember Federation GROUND forces regularly using shields.



What do you mean?

I didn't know "regularly using" was a requirement. On Star Trek, they rarely show ground battles.

-Pr-
i wish EU was canon. Star Trek EU has some scary shit when it comes to ground battles, even from starfleet. shit like hidden transporter pads that auto beam any poor soul who sets foot on them in to orbit and the like...

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by -Pr-
i wish EU was canon. Star Trek EU has some scary shit when it comes to ground battles, even from starfleet. shit like hidden transporter pads that auto beam any poor soul who sets foot on them in to orbit and the like...

Wow, that's cold-blooded.

-Pr-
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Wow, that's cold-blooded.

yup, but awesome at the same time.

they also had transporter scramblers. they wouldn't stop you beaming down, but as you materialised they'd scatter your molecules. i wonder if that's at all painful...

BruceSkywalker
The Federation stomps

Hewhoknowsall
Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
The Federation stomps

Because...

bloodoverme
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
You make good points, but:

This is only a ground battle. No air support or space support is allowed. Starfleet doesn't use tanks because they could just use fighters, but now in this case we're talking about a pure ground battle.

What is the range of a phaser? Artillery can strike from many kilometers away.

US ground forces stomps!!! GO JOES!!!

USA all the way!!!!

happy? roll eyes (sarcastic)

Hewhoknowsall
Originally posted by bloodoverme
US ground forces stomps!!! GO JOES!!!

USA all the way!!!!

happy? roll eyes (sarcastic)

I'm not saying that USA wins, although since you apparently don't have any counter to my argument and try and make it so that I am the wrong one by making me seem like a persistent US fanboy without actually countering any of my points, I shall assume that you are admitting defeat.

Doctor-Alvis
Based on what I've seen in the show/movies, I don't see the Trek ground forces being able to just fight head on like soldiers. Except for that sweet ass dunebuggy, I don't remember any ground vehicles and they don't wear any armor. But I could see them being really effective if they used those cloaking suits and just walked in and wide beamed everything.

-Pr-
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
Sorry I took me so long to respond, but:

Now I don't remember Federation GROUND forces regularly using shields.



What do you mean?

they are readily available, though, and they work. an artillery shell isn't penetrating one of those shields.

Darth Truculent
Two names - Rangers and Green Beret. Special Forces could strike before they knew they were there. A TR-116 is a good sniper rifle, but a .50 caliber is devasting. Can kill a target up two miles and burn through tank armor. You keep forgeting the LAW anti-tank missile system and landmines. Mobile tube rocket launchers. Artillery can fire biological and chemical weapons. The Army (infantry) isn't just equipped with the good ole M-16: M4-A1 Carbine, M-14 with thermal sighting, M4-A1 Grenadier, M-16 Grenadier, SAW, HK-5 submachine gun, SCAR, Javelin anti-tank missile and i could list a whole lot more. A phaser rifle from ranges beyond 100 meters isn't very accurate.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Darth Truculent
Two names - Rangers and Green Beret. Special Forces could strike before they knew they were there. A TR-116 is a good sniper rifle, but a .50 caliber is devasting. Can kill a target up two miles and burn through tank armor. You keep forgeting the LAW anti-tank missile system and landmines. Mobile tube rocket launchers. Artillery can fire biological and chemical weapons. The Army (infantry) isn't just equipped with the good ole M-16: M4-A1 Carbine, M-14 with thermal sighting, M4-A1 Grenadier, M-16 Grenadier, SAW, HK-5 submachine gun, SCAR, Javelin anti-tank missile and i could list a whole lot more. A phaser rifle from ranges beyond 100 meters isn't very accurate.

Star Trek shields make all of those things you listed nil.

Doctor-Alvis
Also, tricorders.

BruceSkywalker
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
Because...


well lets see... phasers, phaser rifles.. Data and Worf taking care of business which being flanked by riker and possibly la forge.. then shittlecraf/runabouts can destroy from above..

Darth Truculent
Simple tactic - U.S. ground forces ambush. Sniper kills the guys holding the tricoder and bullets begin flying. Half of ST troops are cut down in less than two seconds. Landmines blow off legs and grenades do the rest of the work. Superior technology does not always mean victory.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Darth Truculent
Simple tactic - U.S. ground forces ambush. Sniper kills the guys holding the tricoder and bullets begin flying. Half of ST troops are cut down in less than two seconds. Landmines blow off legs and grenades do the rest of the work. Superior technology does not always mean victory.

So, in other words, the Federation ground forces are stupid? That is not how they are portrayed in the TV show and movies. They would first pound the battle field from orbit, then beam down elite troops to set up force fields. They would then beam down normal troops and support. The outcome: U.S. ground forces captured or killed. Federation ground forces? 0 casualties.

BruceSkywalker
Originally posted by Darth Truculent
Simple tactic - U.S. ground forces ambush. Sniper kills the guys holding the tricoder and bullets begin flying. Half of ST troops are cut down in less than two seconds. Landmines blow off legs and grenades do the rest of the work. Superior technology does not always mean victory.

you are also forgetting that nothing will harm Data so once he takes everything the US troops have, then Worf, Riker, and the rest of the Away Team will simply destroy the Us troops

Doctor-Alvis
Originally posted by Darth Truculent
Simple tactic - U.S. ground forces ambush. Sniper kills the guys holding the tricoder and bullets begin flying. Half of ST troops are cut down in less than two seconds. Landmines blow off legs and grenades do the rest of the work. Superior technology does not always mean victory.
The tricorders would prevent the ambush though. And if they're using everything they've used in visual mediums, they may be invisible too.

Hewhoknowsall
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
So, in other words, the Federation ground forces are stupid? That is not how they are portrayed in the TV show and movies. They would first pound the battle field from orbit, then beam down elite troops to set up force fields. They would then beam down normal troops and support. The outcome: U.S. ground forces captured or killed. Federation ground forces? 0 casualties.

The thread specifications say that no space forces are allowed.

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
you are also forgetting that nothing will harm Data so once he takes everything the US troops have, then Worf, Riker, and the rest of the Away Team will simply destroy the Us troops

Who said that Data is in this?

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
The thread specifications say that no space forces are allowed...

That really doesn't make any difference. It just makes the battle last longer.

BruceSkywalker
Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall



Who said that Data is in this?


if you have ever watched star trek TNG you'd know that 90 % of the time Data was always on away missions...

Darth Truculent
A .50 caliber can easily destroy Data. It can burn through tank armor. Can't remember the name of the Episode or what season, but the Jem'Hadar actually overran a Federation position during a ground engagement. Where were the Federation's vaunted shields? Phaser rifles were used as clubs. Where were the Federation held their position there were numerous casaulties.

If the Army attacked a Federation position, Federation troops would be overrun and destroyed. Sorry guys - the Federation is not a militaristic society and would lose.

Doctor-Alvis
Originally posted by Darth Truculent
Where were the Federation's vaunted shields?
The plot probably ate them.

Acrosurge
Originally posted by Darth Truculent
Can't remember the name of the Episode or what season, but the Jem'Hadar actually overran a Federation position during a ground engagement. Where were the Federation's vaunted shields? Phaser rifles were used as clubs. Where were the Federation held their position there were numerous casaulties.You're talking about the Ds9 episode "The Siege of AR-558". The Federation army in question was a tiny group tasked to occupy a distant Dominion communication outpost. This group had not been resupplied, restocked, or supported by Starfleet. They had no resources and were facing the Jem Hadar (soldiers superior to US troops in every way). That is a completely different scenario from the one described in this thread. If anything, it actually proves the resilience of Federation troops for them to have survived for that long without resources or tactical support.

Darth Truculent
A flash grenade would stuns the hell out of anyone. A grenadier fired from a M4-A1 Grenadier would kill or wound a lot in the area. A unit like a squad of Rangers or Green Beret would overrun the position. I'm not saying it would be a push over, but the U.S. military is more disciplined and a better fighting force. Federation troops would not be used to automatic weapons fire like the SAW.

By the way, thanks for the name of the episode.

Acrosurge
Originally posted by Darth Truculent
A flash grenade would stuns the hell out of anyone. A grenadier fired from a M4-A1 Grenadier would kill or wound a lot in the area. A single photon grenade launched by one Federation soldier and guided by a single tricorder could stun (or kill if so desired) everything within a couple thousand meters of the blast. Photon Grenades have a range of two to three miles. That's just one, hand-held, single-man weapon.

Originally posted by Darth Truculent
A unit like a squad of Rangers or Green Beret would overrun the position.How would they get close? With tricorders, the Feds would know exactly where they'd be coming from and could eliminate them, either with TR-116s, photon grenades, or transporters. And even if they got close, a single phaser set to wide spread could vaporize an entire squad in a single shot.

Originally posted by Darth Truculent
but the U.S. military is more disciplined and a better fighting force.This is debatable, since we've never seen Starfleet's elite soldiers in action, only their naval/star forces. Regardless, the US Military will have to overcome a severe technological advantage and will have to do it without any sort of communications (which Tricorders can easily jam). The US Military would also have to overcome a total loss of any computer-assisted tactical weapons, as tricorders have been shown to hack 20th/21st century technology with ease.

Originally posted by Darth Truculent
Federation troops would not be used to automatic weapons fire like the SAW.Starfleet has fought against many races with automatic weapons that possess greater firepower than the SAW (the Jem'Hadar and the Remans are just two races off the top of my head). Not only that, but since most Fed phasers can emit a continuous stream of firepower for as long as the "trigger" is held, this would make them the superior to any SAW. SAWs cannot stun. They cannot vaporize armored targets. They cannot be set to cover a wide area.

Darth Truculent
Shoot and scoot is the special forces tactic - .50 caliber sniper rifle from over a mile away and who ever is ever is manning a tricoder or a photon grenade launcher is dead. Automatic projectile weapons fire is very noisy. A light or RPG is as dangerous as a photon launcher.

BruceSkywalker
Originally posted by Darth Truculent
Shoot and scoot is the special forces tactic - .50 caliber sniper rifle from over a mile away and who ever is ever is manning a tricoder or a photon grenade launcher is dead. Automatic projectile weapons fire is very noisy. A light or RPG is as dangerous as a photon launcher.


bullets will do nothing to Data except bounce off

after all the bullets are gone the U.S Military is toast as they nothing to compare to tricoders, phasers/rifles


let me also say that Data is very very fast and can evade lasers so he will also evade the bullets as well

Acrosurge
Originally posted by Darth Truculent
Shoot and scoot is the special forces tactic - .50 caliber sniper rifle from over a mile away and who ever is ever is manning a tricoder or a photon grenade launcher is dead.A tricorder is an active and passive scanning device that can pinpoint lifeforms from hundreds of miles away. The Feds will know exactly where a sniper would be hiding and exactly what kind of gear he/she is carrying. Snipers could not surprise them. Basically, the Feds will know the US Army's deployment. Not only are they outmatched technologically, but US forces will not be able to communicate with each other (Tricorders can block all electronic equipment or hack it and every Fed soldier would be carrying one) and any computer controlled or assisted equipment will be compromised. I'm not sure you understand how huge a handicap a lank of communication AND computer hardware would be for the military.

Originally posted by Darth Truculent
Automatic projectile weapons fire is very noisy. A light or RPG is as dangerous as a photon launcher. Noise would make absolutely no difference for Fed troops that have been seasoned by the Dominion War.

According the resources I looked at, RPGs have a range of less than 300 meters and a blast radius of 7 to 10 meters. Photon grenades have a range of 2 to 3 miles and blast radius of hundreds of meters and could be guided by tricorders for pinpoint accuracy. Photon Grenades >>> RPGs.

Darth Truculent
A .50 round burns through TANK armor and TANK armor is far denser than Data.

About tricoders, you know the location of the individual, but can you see him or her? Special forces units operate in squads like the Rangers or Green Beret. I'm not talking about a full scale assault right now, but a special forces probe would determine the strength of the Federation position before the main attack commenced.

Acrosurge
Originally posted by Darth Truculent
About tricoders, you know the location of the individual, but can you see him or her? Special forces units operate in squads like the Rangers or Green Beret. I'm not talking about a full scale assault right now, but a special forces probe would determine the strength of the Federation position before the main attack commenced. A tricorder uses 235 physical and electromagnetic sensors to collect data and could provide the exact location and composition of enemy troops, regardless of the terrain mentioned above. So, yes, they can "see" incoming enemies with the precision to launch pinpoint photon strikes or transporter actions. No special forces could get within hundreds of miles of the Feds.

Tricorders could also be used to project holograms of Federation troops in different locations. Without sensors, the US military would have no way of distinguishing these holograms from the real thing.

Darth Truculent
Thermal sighting my friend. Special forces customize their weapons and a thermal sight is one of the more favored. Yes a tricoder can pinpoint the exact location, but the slug would already be fired. If it was fired from a .50, the target would most likely be the man or woman manning photon launcher.

I'm quite sure that Federation forces could not survive battles like Mogadishu, Tora Bora, Panama and other ops that the military doesn't tell us. It's a question of superior technology vs superior military training. What type of hand-to-hand fighting is the Federation trained in? Rangers, Green Beret, SEALS, Delta Force, Air Force PJs can kill a person in seconds. I would bet money that a fully trained SEAL can kill a Jem'hadar or a Klingon in hand-to-hand.

Doctor-Alvis
If holograms were used, wouldn't thermal imaging only see a solid wall and not actual people?

Darth Truculent
No. Thermal sights read body heat and a hologram does not have a heat signature.

Doctor-Alvis
But some of them create solid walls. It would be reading the surface of the forcefield and not anything past it.

-Pr-
holograms + no safety protocols = killing machines.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Darth Truculent
No. Thermal sights read body heat and a hologram does not have a heat signature.

Thermal sights read heat radiation from any objects that produce heat. Star Trek holograms can produce heat, even though real holograms do not.

Darth Truculent
I've looked through thermal sighting and believe me it distinguishes real targets and non-targets. They see through walls and snipers are trained to identify enemy combatants from non-combatants. Plus, an M-14 or a .50 with a supressor is absolutely lethal. Death from afar with zero sound - priceless.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Darth Truculent
I've looked through thermal sighting and believe me it distinguishes real targets and non-targets. They see through walls and snipers are trained to identify enemy combatants from non-combatants. Plus, an M-14 or a .50 with a supressor is absolutely lethal. Death from afar with zero sound - priceless.

When Star Trek is on TV, use your thermal sighting on the TV, and you will not be able to see anyone. The people on Star Trek are completely invisible to thermal sights. big grin

-Pr-
Originally posted by Darth Truculent
I've looked through thermal sighting and believe me it distinguishes real targets and non-targets. They see through walls and snipers are trained to identify enemy combatants from non-combatants. Plus, an M-14 or a .50 with a supressor is absolutely lethal. Death from afar with zero sound - priceless.

star trek holograms look, act and move like real people. its not that easy to tell the difference.

Doctor-Alvis
I'm pretty sure thermal imaging doesn't see through walls. There was even that episode of mythbusters where the only thing that beat the thermal detector was a simple sheet of glass.

Acrosurge
Originally posted by Darth Truculent
Plus, an M-14 or a .50 with a supressor is absolutely lethal. Death from afar with zero sound - priceless. With tricorders, the Feds would know exactly where the shooters would be before they get into range. Again, you seem to be ignoring the technological gap that the US army must overcome here. And they must do it without any kind of computer support or communication, since Starfleet's gear can disrupt both.

Darth Truculent
A man/woman or alien walking around with a tricoder is an easy target. We have superior technological advantage in Afghanistan and the Taliban seem to be doing just fine. Who ever is holding the lightsaber is the target, then the commander of the unit. Or just send up a Predator drone.

Doctor-Alvis
The gap in technology between the US and the Taliban and the US and the Federation doesn't seem comparable. The US is going to be trying to spot people who are hidden behind holograms and force fields with no communications. That means the Predator drone won't work, with a very possible chance of someone from the Federation taking it over.

Acrosurge
Originally posted by Doctor-Alvis
The gap in technology between the US and the Taliban and the US and the Federation doesn't seem comparable. The US is going to be trying to spot people who are hidden behind holograms and force fields with no communications. That means the Predator drone won't work, with a very possible chance of someone from the Federation taking it over. ^This.

And with no communication or computer support (no satellites, no targeting, no guidance), the US would be limited to LOS firing or guesses. I don't know that the holograms and shields would even be necessary. 1 tricorder + 1 photon grenade = the pinpoint, total decimation of entire companies of US soldiers and tanks from miles away, regardless of terrain.

BruceSkywalker
Originally posted by Acrosurge
^This.

And with no communication or computer support (no satellites, no targeting, no guidance), the US would be limited to LOS firing or guesses. I don't know that the holograms and shields would even be necessary. 1 tricorder + 1 photon grenade = the pinpoint, total decimation of entire companies of US soldiers and tanks from miles away, regardless of terrain.


there just ins't anything the US Troops can do here

Darth Truculent
The Federation is not trained to think like an independant unit. A sniper waits patiently for that one shot and when that shot is made - it is always a kill.
I have yet to read, watch or look up a battle where Federation troops fought for 18 hours straight like Mogadishu (Rangers & Delta Force). Maybe Flajuha or Tora Bora when the 82nd were pinned down and nearly overrun 3 times and survived and almost ran out of ammunition and the wounded still fought.

They simply do not have the training the Army has. God help them if they faced the Marines.

Doctor-Alvis
Eunno... you keep bringing the federation down to the current military's level. A sniper is pretty deadly when they can see their target and their position is always very clear to their enemy. Special Ops are pretty effective when they're not facing walls of energy or being evaporated by lasers.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.