The Last Flight of XM594 - A P&S Spin-off.

Coulsdon Eagle · Apr 12, 2012

Lemon flavoured said:
Indeed Newark does have two stations (I might be wrong, but I've always assumed it's the smallest town with two stations), one on what was at some point called the Midland Line (Leicester - Nottingham - Lincoln) and the other on the ECML.

IIRC Nottingham was hit by 1 bomb.

FYI the small town of Coulsdon in Surrey used to have 5 (five!) railway stations: Coulsdon North; Coulsdon South; Smitham; Reedham; & Woodmansterne.

That was more than the entire county of Northamptonshire. Now we scrape by with only four..

Being 13 miles from Westminster and with Gatwick Airport not far to the south, ITTL I suspect we may have lost one or two of those.

Bernard Woolley · Apr 13, 2012

I'm assuming several railway lines run through Coulsdon?

Coulsdon Eagle · Apr 14, 2012

JN1 said:
I'm assuming several railway lines run through Coulsdon?

Not really - the main line to Brighton, a terminus at Coulsdon North (closed in the 1980s) & the Tattenham Corner branch line. However most of the terraced houses in the centre of the small town were built by the railway companies in the 1890s.

modelcitizen · Apr 14, 2012

Good update.

Notable that esprit de corps is good enough that no one is muttering "doesn't matter where or if we land" etc.

Bernard Woolley · Apr 14, 2012

Thanks.

Their families may well still be alive, hence the wish to get home. Moreover the war is not over yet, XM594 might have to fly another sortie.

Bernard Woolley · Apr 14, 2012

Coulsdon Eagle said:
Not really - the main line to Brighton, a terminus at Coulsdon North (closed in the 1980s) & the Tattenham Corner branch line. However most of the terraced houses in the centre of the small town were built by the railway companies in the 1890s.

That explains it then. The advantages of living in a railway town.
AFAIK Coulsdon has almost as many railway stations in it as Edinburgh.

Edit: The ever accurate wiki lists six stations in the Coulsdon area!

Tovarich · Apr 15, 2012

Erm, considering comments I just made on another thread, I feel it's a good idea to come here and point out I do genuinely enjoy this story, it's actually my favourite of the many P&S-spinoffs.

Lemon flavoured said:
Nice (well, as nice as possible in this TL) to see it head to Newark.

You are a generous character!
I'd be reluctant to see several hundred tons of metal travelling at 500mph and only kept airborne by fuel which has just runout heading in my direction

RandomChance · Apr 15, 2012

Tovarich said:
You are a generous character!
I'd be reluctant to see several hundred tons of metal travelling at 500mph and only kept airborne by fuel which has just runout heading in my direction

At least the chaps aren't carrying any nasty bombs any more. Crashing and spreading a bog load of radioactive material might make the locals frown, even given all the other business.

basileus · Apr 15, 2012

Mmmmm.
In real nuclear war scenario, how many nukes would initiate just while the plane is flying? Technically, wouldn't most of those launched by missile be already exploded when the Vulcan eventually reaches Soviet territory? And if so, just how atomic mushrooms, smoke and contamination would hamper the flight?

Matt Wiser · Apr 15, 2012

If it's not over, then the remaining bombers-not just the RAF's, but returning Tornados, F-111s, and any Buffs that land in the U.K. may have to go out again. And the threat's not just from bombers: mobile SS-20s and remaining missile boats out there....and with BMEWS gone, there will be no warning.

Which raises another interesting question: did the RAF have bomber recovery teams, as SAC did? In the prewar crisis, SAC expected to sent teams out from main operating bases to ride out the attack, and then go to surviving civilian airports, or to straight stretches of interstate highway, to receive returning aircraft, refuel and rearm them, and be ready to send them out again.

Bernard Woolley · Apr 17, 2012

Matt,
No idea. But I do know that a senior RAF officer advised a V-bomber pilot to keep flying east and find himself a nice Mongolian wife.

Matt Wiser · Apr 17, 2012

You do know the old SAC joke, right? One crew to an island. At least when women began flying tankers, they had an advantage in that scenario.....

ivfl · Apr 17, 2012

So far we've been discussing following the plans whatever they may be,but what was SAC's policy regarding conflict termination.Was there anything like ok we bomb them and bomb them again and again until we reach the limit of our reserves presumably and then what?How did SAC define victory in practical terms?

Weaver · Apr 17, 2012

I think that the war would simply peter out as weapons are expended, recovery facilities destroyed and contact lost with National Command Authorities. Eventually individual crews of isolated weapon delivery systems would probably just walk away and meld into the surviving populations as best they could.

The best placed would be surviving SSNs and SSBNs....they could pick their final destinations after reviewing what was left, and be warmly welcomed by surviving governments as potent weapons in a chaotic world.

I doubt that there would ever be a formal armistice or negotiated peace between the warring nations.

ubergeek · Apr 17, 2012

Weaver said:
I think that the war would simply peter out as weapons are expended, recovery facilities destroyed and contact lost with National Command Authorities. Eventually individual crews of isolated weapon delivery systems would probably just walk away and meld into the surviving populations as best they could.

The best placed would be surviving SSNs and SSBNs....they could pick their final destinations after reviewing what was left, and be warmly welcomed by surviving governments as potent weapons in a chaotic world.

I doubt that there would ever be a formal armistice or negotiated peace between the warring nations.

As per 'On the Beach' A really good, quick read however so very depressing. I dont know about the creeping death of radiation making its way south though...

Bernard Woolley · Apr 18, 2012

To be honest I hated it and couldn't wait for them all to get killed. Noel Coward was absolutley spot on about the characters.

The creeping death of fall-out is nonsense. Fall-out, well, falls out. It settles on the ground and radiation decays.
Why the Aussie government didn't build shelters rather than make suicide pills has always puzzled me.

I do think that is possible that the surviving leadership on both sides would be able to contact each other. After all leadership bunkers are believed to have been withhelds on target plans.

Shaby · Apr 18, 2012

JN1 said:
I do think that is possible that the surviving leadership on both sides would be able to contact each other. After all leadership bunkers are believed to have been withhelds on target plans.

Unless somebody panics or an unlucky hit manages to bag head of state of one side. Something like what nearly happened in 'By dawns early light'. But, generally I believe it would make good sense to leave somebody to negotiate. If what I read in sparsely available literature I managed to get my hands on, if war broke out initial thinking was to go counter-force. Once that failed (as it most certainly would) it would then end up playing chicken with largest cities remaining on both sides being hostages. Until, as JFK said, cooler heads prevailed. If any were left. I stumbled on this trans-attack deterrence in the aforementioned book. How realistic is it and would it be possible to negotiate at all in post exchange environment?

Bernard Woolley · Apr 18, 2012

I'm guessing negotiation would have to be done via radio, or possibly the Hot Line if it still existed.
By Dawn's Early Light (and the source book Trinity's Child) effectivley portray a BOOB attack, which, IMVHO, is probably not likely. It is more likely that there would be a crisis, a la P&S, giving time for leaders to be evacuated/dispersed (as we've seen in the UK).

Garrison · Apr 18, 2012

JN1 said:
To be honest I hated it and couldn't wait for them all to get killed. Noel Coward was absolutley spot on about the characters.

The creeping death of fall-out is nonsense. Fall-out, well, falls out. It settles on the ground and radiation decays.
Why the Aussie government didn't build shelters rather than make suicide pills has always puzzled me.

I do think that is possible that the surviving leadership on both sides would be able to contact each other. After all leadership bunkers are believed to have been withhelds on target plans.

Yeah that's what annoyed me about that plot, it seemed to assume that no one could possibly survive a nuclear war, period. Even if that were true I would expect people to try, not just sit back and wait to die.

JasonQ · Apr 18, 2012

JN1 said:
To be honest I hated it and couldn't wait for them all to get killed. Noel Coward was absolutley spot on about the characters.

The creeping death of fall-out is nonsense. Fall-out, well, falls out. It settles on the ground and radiation decays.
Why the Aussie government didn't build shelters rather than make suicide pills has always puzzled me.

Wasn't the scenario on OTB centered around the massive use of cobalt-salted weapons? I mean, yeah, fallout falls out, but Cobalt-60 is nasty shit. Put enough into the atmosphere, and everyone is going to get a dose.

As for how realistic the scenario itself is, I can't comment much, given my limited knowledge of weather patterns.