[For Scifi Spaceship fans] How would you rectify these concepts in a space-warfare era setting?

[CheertheSecond]

So there are things that will have to be redefine or clarify when it came to space warfare. Feel free to share your way of doing it. Below is my opinion.

Missile / Torpedo: Self-propelled Payload
If the Payload moves by using Reaction engine, it is called a Missile. For what is a Reaction engine, the wikipedia page explains it better.
If the Payload moves by any mean other than a Reaction engine, it is classified as Torpedo.
Whether a Self-propelled Payload is guided or not is inconsequential.


Military rank
This will depend on the culture.

Typically the Admiral series rank would be considered to be the most senior in the Space Age.

Which means the senior ranks will be

• Commodore / Flotilla Admiral - One Star
• Rear Admiral - 2 Stars
• Vice Admiral - 3 Stars
• Admiral - 4 Stars
• Fleet Admiral - 5 Stars

However, there may also be cultures that use Marshal as its most senior ranks. In short, the Marshal rank replaces Fleet Admiral as senior rank to the Admirals.

Cultures that use a hybrid of Admiral and Marshal rank in my fic has a distinction due to its political system.

Admirals are tied to its noble houses. Hence, instead of being called a Duke or a Marquis, they were called Admiral or Vice Admiral, and their fleet are part of the kingdom/central power. It doesn't change the fact that the fleets are their private army. Marshal on the other hand is used for ranks within the army of the king/emperor/central government. Marshal and Admiral both command their respective fleets. How superior an admiral to another admiral or to the marshal depends on the political climate of the current time.

Generals, in case of General of the Marine corp, could be considered subordinates to the space naval office. Despite equivalent in rank to an Admiral, it may be inferior to said rank.

Generals of the Army force, depends on the culture can be equal or superior to Admiral rank. The duty of the Army and, therefore, the generals are to planetary defence. It would jeopardise the defence effort to allow a non-bound rank like Admiral to hold more power in the region than the generals which were trained specifically for such task.

Other synonym of military ranks in Space Age I could think of are:

• Herald / Fleet Herald - One Star
• Vice Lord - 2 Stars
• Lord of the Third rank - 3 Stars
• Fleet Archon / Fleet Lord / Lord of the Second rank - 4 Stars
• First Lord of the Navy / Highlord of the Navy - 5 Stars

• Senior Shipmaster
• Squadron Master
• Fleet Master (Lower) / Master of Junior rank
• Fleet Master (Upper) / Master of Senior rank
• Chief of the Fleet

For ranks that even above the 5-star rank, I got a few but what they would be called will depend on the culture/organisation.

Grand Marshal / Director of All Armed Forces / Master of War / Lord President of the Office of Warfare and National Security / Generalissimus / etc.



EDIT
I think I owe everyone a statement of purpose as in author owes 70% of how their audience interpret their writing.

This thread is but a conversation prompt. I didn't make it with the intention of getting an universal consensus, nor did I hope to push my ideology. I was more into gathering people with interest to our thought on the topic. I didn't and still don't want to find out how a writer should write about these in their fic nor do I want to exclude non-realistic chat. Sci-fi is still fiction and there are always room for creative design as long as it fits their fiction. After all, the spirit of idea sharing isn't always about right or wrong.

 

[Corty]

How would you rectify these concepts in a space-warfare era setting?​

I would write an interesting story first and foremost, military lingo be damned. Everything is interesting to research for the writer but nobody would raise an eye if you don’t adhere to those points above if the story is good.

I could call my ship crew as Vesselbound and nobody would question it if the story is good.

 

[Deleted member 84247]

I would write an interesting story first and foremost, military lingo be damned. Everything is interesting to research for the writer but nobody would raise an eye if you don’t adhere to those points above if the story is good.

I could call my ship crew as Vesselbound and nobody would question it if the story is good.

This is true. The story matters most.

So there are things that will have to be redefine or clarify when it came to space warfare. Feel free to share your way of doing it. Below is my opinion.

Missile / Torpedo: Self-propelled Payload
If the Payload moves by using Reaction engine, it is called a Missile. For what is a Reaction engine, the wikipedia page explains it better.
If the Payload moves by any mean other than a Reaction engine, it is classified as Torpedo.
Whether a Self-propelled Payload is guided or not is inconsequential.


Military rank
This will depend on the culture.

Typically the Admiral series rank would be considered to be the most senior in the Space Age.

Which means the senior ranks will be

• Commodore / Flotilla Admiral - One Star
• Rear Admiral - 2 Stars
• Vice Admiral - 3 Stars
• Admiral - 4 Stars
• Fleet Admiral - 5 Stars

However, there may also be cultures that use Marshal as its most senior ranks. In short, the Marshal rank replaces Fleet Admiral as senior rank to the Admirals.

Cultures that use a hybrid of Admiral and Marshal rank in my fic has a distinction due to its political system.

Admirals are tied to its noble houses. Hence, instead of being called a Duke or a Marquis, they were called Admiral or Vice Admiral, and their fleet are part of the kingdom/central power. It doesn't change the fact that the fleets are their private army. Marshal on the other hand is used for ranks within the army of the king/emperor/central government. Marshal and Admiral both command their respective fleets. How superior an admiral to another admiral or to the marshal depends on the political climate of the current time.

Generals, in case of General of the Marine corp, could be considered subordinates to the space naval office. Despite equivalent in rank to an Admiral, it may be inferior to said rank.

Generals of the Army force, depends on the culture can be equal or superior to Admiral rank. The duty of the Army and, therefore, the generals are to planetary defence. It would jeopardise the defence effort to allow a non-bound rank like Admiral to hold more power in the region than the generals which were trained specifically for such task.

Other synonym of military ranks in Space Age I could think of are:

• Herald / Fleet Herald - One Star
• Vice Lord - 2 Stars
• Lord of the Third rank - 3 Stars
• Fleet Archon / Fleet Lord / Lord of the Second rank - 4 Stars
• First Lord of the Navy / Highlord of the Navy - 5 Stars

• Senior Shipmaster
• Squadron Master
• Fleet Master (Lower) / Master of Junior rank
• Fleet Master (Upper) / Master of Senior rank
• Chief of the Fleet

For ranks that even above the 5-star rank, I got a few but what they would be called will depend on the culture/organisation.

Grand Marshal / Director of All Armed Forces / Master of War / Lord President of the Office of Warfare and National Security / Generalissimus / etc.

Enterestingly, the US Space Force uses the same officer ranks as the US Army. That means it starts from the two lieutenant ranks, and ends at the General rank.

That being said, you can really do anything with sci-fi. You can invent the wheelhouse with ranks, or you can play it safe.

 

[LilRora]

I'm curious, is there actually a way to move something in space without using a reaction engine? Because I'm pretty sure there isn't, unless we go into funky technology that might as well be called magic.

Also, in regards to military ranks and which is superior, I would first and foremost consider if there should be any of certain kind. For example army force, which is the future might as well not exist. That would depend on the setting of course, but there's no need for an army on a planet that's ruled by a single person/group/country; in such case you would probably only have emergency response teams, private forces, that kind of things.

And in terms of noble titles, I recommend watching this video:

It always annoys me in stories when I see, for example, noble demons with five ranks that only differ in power. Noble titles didn't appear because someone arbitrarily decided to divide them into five ranks; in fact, they are not even linear as really many people believe. Each title has a reason for its existence, and likely a reason for its name (although that second one generally can't be traced back far enough).

For military ranks it's not that important, but if you want to do it realistically, you shouldn't make five senior ranks just because you want there to be five. I would personally come up with how it had been decided at first when certain formations appeared, and how those ranks adapted to changing reality.

Or, well, you can skip most of it and just do whatever fits if it's not a very important element of the story. But still, if it is important, you should always consider the past and origins of whatever it is.

 

[TASTYLEADPAINT]

Missile / Torpedo: Self-propelled Payload
If the Payload moves by using Reaction engine, it is called a Missile. For what is a Reaction engine, the wikipedia page explains it better.
If the Payload moves by any mean other than a Reaction engine, it is classified as Torpedo.
Whether a Self-propelled Payload is guided or not is inconsequential.

I'm struggling to understand what you are trying to say here. Do you want to redefine thease. Either way does it actually matter ? I mean to the average layman thease 2 terms may as well be the same. Both deliver payload that go boom

If your redefining this for a story then I think you are overthinking it.

 

[Sabruness]

on the missile/torpedo dichotomy, mine tend to divide moreso on their maneuvering and capaibilty to adjust during 'flight'. propulsion is only a minor factor as most of the missile/torpedo weaponry uses some form of reactive engine as primary propulsion except for a few classes of torpedoes which use the momentum of their launching craft as the primary propulsion and only activate their onboard propulsion at the last instance to enhance the kinetic energy and force of the impact.

on ranks... i'll come back to it. watch this space as i need to define and clarify my basic ideas.

 

[Arkus86]

I'm curious, is there actually a way to move something in space without using a reaction engine? Because I'm pretty sure there isn't, unless we go into funky technology that might as well be called magic.

Solar sails are a thing, without even going into the theoretical means of propulsion in space. Though it would not be exactly convenient method to move payloads during a battle.

 

[CheertheSecond]

I think I owe everyone a statement of purpose as in author owes 70% of how their audience interpret their writing.

This thread is but a conversation prompt. I didn't make it with the intention of getting an universal consensus, nor did I hope to push my ideology. I was more into gathering people with interest to our thought on the topic. I didn't and still don't want to find out how a writer should write about these in their fic nor do I want to exclude non-realistic chat. Sci-fi is still fiction and there are always room for creative design as long as it fits their fiction. After all, the spirit of idea sharing isn't always about right or wrong.

 

[APieceOfRock]

Enterestingly, the US Space Force uses the same officer ranks as the US Army. That means it starts from the two lieutenant ranks, and ends at the General rank.

That being said, you can really do anything with sci-fi. You can invent the wheelhouse with ranks, or you can play it safe.

There's a Space Force? Are we fighting aliens?

 

[Deleted member 84247]

There's a Space Force? Are we fighting aliens?

(?Out of reactions) There do be a Space Force.

 

[Corty]

(?Out of reactions) There do be a Space Force.

 

[TiggerBane]

Which means the senior ranks will be

• Commodore / Flotilla Admiral - One Star
• Rear Admiral - 2 Stars
• Vice Admiral - 3 Stars
• Admiral - 4 Stars
• Fleet Admiral - 5 Stars

However, there may also be cultures that use Marshal as its most senior ranks. In short, the Marshal rank replaces Fleet Admiral as senior rank to the Admirals.

Cultures that use a hybrid of Admiral and Marshal rank in my fic has a distinction due to its political system.

Admirals are tied to its noble houses. Hence, instead of being called a Duke or a Marquis, they were called Admiral or Vice Admiral, and their fleet are part of the kingdom/central power. It doesn't change the fact that the fleets are their private army. Marshal on the other hand is used for ranks within the army of the king/emperor/central government. Marshal and Admiral both command their respective fleets. How superior an admiral to another admiral or to the marshal depends on the political climate of the current time.

Lord High Admiral, as a political role that has to play games for resources in the court rather than act as an actual strategist or such but is nominally the head of the navy at least below the ruler of the nobility of a nation. Replaced by things such as the Secretary of the Navy for a democracy.

The actual head of the navy being something such as Chief of Naval Operations in a Democracy or First Lord of the Admiralty in a nobility centric system they are required to actually run the day to day affairs of the navy whilst informing their counterpart who explicitly can't have been in the navy before of what is actually necessary and have to get their approval on things such as recruitment spending and such as well as the governments basically a way to separate the powers so that the navy can't rebel.

Likewise there should be one for the army, the boats/submarines and the airforce with the different levels being sought after at different amounts depending on how many of the different types of planets each faction has, like if there is a large amount of heavily liquid planets the boat/submarine group is heavily sought after but in one with lots of gas giants the airforce position is highly sought after.

 

[Sabruness]

Enterestingly, the US Space Force uses the same officer ranks as the US Army. That means it starts from the two lieutenant ranks, and ends at the General rank.

that's because the officer ranks for the army, marines and air force are all practically the same at this point. so they just ported them over to the space force. where it gets odd is the enlisted ranks with sergeant and up being derived from the air force versions (which grades them differently to army and marine corp sergeant ranks) and the specialist ranks replacing the 'airman' ranks of the air force but also recycling the army 'specialist' rating system that was used from 1920 til about 1942

 

[Deleted member 84247]

the specialist ranks replacing the 'airman' ranks of the air force but also recycling the army 'specialist' rating system that was used from 1920 til about 1942

Yea I noticed that. Pretty weird. They should have just full on used the Airforce ranks or something.

 

[sanitylimited]

Yea I noticed that. Pretty weird. They should have just full on used the Airforce ranks or something.

they dont even use the same salute in some contries. militaries are wierd

though whats even stupider is that the reason they all use different camoflage gear is because of trademark/copyright law.

 

[Erios909]

I'm curious, is there actually a way to move something in space without using a reaction engine? Because I'm pretty sure there isn't, unless we go into funky technology that might as well be called magic.

1. Hard Sci-Fi:
   • Scientific Accuracy: Hard sci-fi places a strong emphasis on scientific accuracy, logic, and detail. The technologies and phenomena presented are either based on current scientific understanding or are plausible extrapolations of it.
   • Technical Details: These stories often delve into the technical details of the science and technology being presented. This can include explanations of how a particular piece of technology works or the scientific principles behind a phenomenon.
   • Examples: Arthur C. Clarke's "2001: A Space Odyssey", Kim Stanley Robinson's "Red Mars" series, and Andy Weir's "The Martian" are often cited as examples of hard sci-fi.
   • Themes: While character development and plot are important, the focus often revolves around scientific challenges, technological developments, and their implications.
2. Soft Sci-Fi:
   • Scientific Flexibility: Soft sci-fi is more flexible when it comes to scientific accuracy. It often prioritizes narrative, character development, or philosophical and ethical questions over strict adherence to scientific principles.
   • Speculative Elements: Soft sci-fi might include elements that are currently considered scientifically implausible or even impossible, such as psychic abilities, advanced humanoid aliens, or unexplained faster-than-light travel.
   • Examples: Ursula K. Le Guin's "The Left Hand of Darkness", Frank Herbert's "Dune", and the "Star Wars" series are typically considered soft sci-fi.
   • Themes: Soft sci-fi often uses its speculative elements to explore societal, philosophical, psychological, or political issues. The science or technology serves more as a backdrop or a means to advance the story or themes.

The distinction between hard and soft sci-fi isn't always clear-cut, and many works can fall somewhere in between. One of my favorite genres is soft-scifi that pretends to be hard, that is it has very intricate world building that details all the rules of the new technology introduced, and then sticks with those definitions to provide a backdrop for the world.

 

[LilRora]

1. Hard Sci-Fi:
   • Scientific Accuracy: Hard sci-fi places a strong emphasis on scientific accuracy, logic, and detail. The technologies and phenomena presented are either based on current scientific understanding or are plausible extrapolations of it.
   • Technical Details: These stories often delve into the technical details of the science and technology being presented. This can include explanations of how a particular piece of technology works or the scientific principles behind a phenomenon.
   • Examples: Arthur C. Clarke's "2001: A Space Odyssey", Kim Stanley Robinson's "Red Mars" series, and Andy Weir's "The Martian" are often cited as examples of hard sci-fi.
   • Themes: While character development and plot are important, the focus often revolves around scientific challenges, technological developments, and their implications.
2. Soft Sci-Fi:
   • Scientific Flexibility: Soft sci-fi is more flexible when it comes to scientific accuracy. It often prioritizes narrative, character development, or philosophical and ethical questions over strict adherence to scientific principles.
   • Speculative Elements: Soft sci-fi might include elements that are currently considered scientifically implausible or even impossible, such as psychic abilities, advanced humanoid aliens, or unexplained faster-than-light travel.
   • Examples: Ursula K. Le Guin's "The Left Hand of Darkness", Frank Herbert's "Dune", and the "Star Wars" series are typically considered soft sci-fi.
   • Themes: Soft sci-fi often uses its speculative elements to explore societal, philosophical, psychological, or political issues. The science or technology serves more as a backdrop or a means to advance the story or themes.

The distinction between hard and soft sci-fi isn't always clear-cut, and many works can fall somewhere in between. One of my favorite genres is soft-scifi that pretends to be hard, that is it has very intricate world building that details all the rules of the new technology introduced, and then sticks with those definitions to provide a backdrop for the world.

...This is literally my point.

Say you've got an antimatter engine in a soft sci-fi - everyone a little familiar with the concept with understand right away that it's a very powerful, high-tech engine. But I could call it an aether drive, and what difference would it make? Soft sci-fi doesn't care for that as long as the whole worldbuilding stays coherent.

In hard sci-fi meanwhile, since scientific accuracy is important, there are two choices - either use something and never name it, or don't use it at all since we have nothing in reality that fits the needs of a torpedo.

 

[Erios909]

...This is literally my point.

Say you've got an antimatter engine in a soft sci-fi - everyone a little familiar with the concept with understand right away that it's a very powerful, high-tech engine. But I could call it an aether drive, and what difference would it make? Soft sci-fi doesn't care for that as long as the whole worldbuilding stays coherent.

In hard sci-fi meanwhile, since scientific accuracy is important, there are two choices - either use something and never name it, or don't use it at all since we have nothing in reality that fits the needs of a torpedo.

From your previous post it seemed like you were unaware of soft-sci as a genre.

 

[beast_regards]

I guess that most space opera do understand a torpedo as a heavy payload, a low-range missile with limited manoeuvring designed to target large, slow-moving targets i.e. capital ships, usually in circumstances where the other craft (usually a fighter-bomber) is delivering the torpedo while point defences is busy with other targets. Things in space work as the naval combat in WW2 - whether this is realistic or not is beyond the point.

Other works, which imagine the combat in the more modern term usually just call it missiles