rlfj: Blog

Lots of responses on whether to call a trench a ditch or vice versa. For simplicity’s sake, I made the defensive lines trenches and the offensive lines trenches. A couple of interesting responses:

From: Daragon - Actually, in history both terms were used. On the late western front in WW1, they had infantry trenches and antitank trenches, which were constructed the same way just wider, deeper, and sometimes with more than 90° angles on the sides so that tanks got stuck in the trench. There are reconstructed examples of both being shown in Verdun today. In WW2 the US forces used the distinction of trench and ditch to make identification easier, the British stuck to trench until the end of the war.

From: Dorothy - No idea if this is the same in the US as the UK but a ditch has sloping sides and will maintain its shape over time and a trench has vertical sides and is cut for a specific reason, then re-filled. For example, laying cables and pipes or even for the safety of troops.

I think we can lay this to rest, but I appreciate the info, I truly do.

An email came in specifying:

“A terminology issue -- I thought a trench was what the defending infantry were placed, and the anti-tank features were ditches. You have tanks getting stuck in trenches.”

I never thought about it before, but I had a lack of consistency in my terms. I edited the story and reposted Chapter 26, so that the defensive features were trenches and the anti-tank and anti-personnel features were listed as ditches. Thank you to upper for catching the problem.

For those of you who bought the book, many thanks. When I finish publishing the story on SOL, I will update the version on bookapy. You will then be able to download the final version. If anybody finds typos or other errors, make sure I know. Thanks.

Combat is getting nastier. How many will die? Will the line crack? Enjoy!

It’s begun. Armor, artillery, air power, they are all going to be involved, on both sides. Will the Martians have what it takes to win, or will WestHem overcome the odds? Enjoy!

Several emails have come in asking why the Martians, after ripping through the WestHem fighters, haven’t gone after the orbiting fleet. I discussed it with Al, mentioning the issues people were citing. Here was part of his reply:

“There are multiple reasons why the Martians can't/won't attack orbital platforms of their enemies in orbit, and this was established back in Greenies as one of the lessons of the Jupiter War. Fighter aircraft are easily slaughtered by fixed laser defenses when trying to go up against space stations like Triad or heavily armed warships in orbit. They get potted out of space easily before they can get close enough to engage. And the fighters are not stealth craft since their engines have to burn very hot to maneuver them. In addition, you cannot detonate nuclear weapons in orbit of a planet like Mars or Earth without frying all of your satellites and creating those huge, dangerous debris fields you were talking about. They can go after satellites and attack squadrons of small orbital or orbit to surface craft, but anything bigger than a stealth ship is pretty much invulnerable once orbit is established.”

The master has spoken! I think that pretty much explains it. There was a reason that the nuclear limpet mine attack was conducted after the convoy was beyond lunar orbit.