I am working on a science fiction story and need some help with designing and drawing

overscan (PaulMM) said:
If you seeing TVTropes.org as an instruction guide for book writing, you are using it incorrectly. My opinion, but I do have a 1st class Honours degree in English.
Click to expand...
Hello, I take you are the website owner?
I am not using It as guide,More to find for looking for examples.
Such as Badass Israeli, Killsat and 20 minutes of the future.

Though I have some knowledge about the First One because I went to Israel and dated a local there : knowing the reasons why at the same time you want and dont want a Teimamim Who comes at your First date branding a cool but terryfying the First Time Tavor.
Thanks for the criticismo.
 
Apophenia said:
"I did the research and it felt the same way."

Then I must accept that we define 'research' quite differently.

"What's aping ?"

OED: gerund or present participle: Imitate the behavior or manner of (someone or something).

"... it is also the first time I am dealing with the subject at hand."

So you keep saying. And yet, based on your 'feelings', you reject suggestions by SPF members who are more experienced (in edwest2's case, that includes experienced in publishing).

"Are you being hard on me ?"

If you're still uncertain, the answer is Yes. But not to worry, I won't be back.
Click to expand...
I dont reject them. I have bene on this forum for like less than a week.
Calma down a notch.
 
Just dipping a toe in here.

My advice is to get copies of the roleplaying game Twilight 2000, and its supplement Merc 2000.

It shows how to make a believable setting where the Cold War went hot (or in the case of Merc 2000 - warm) in the near future. For the games it was near future, as it was published in the mid-80s, and extrapolated credible events in the 90s leading to nuclear war.

You might be able to get the setting info just off the web - but if not digital versions are available for good prices.
 
overscan (PaulMM) said:
honor - US English (variant)
honour - Actual English
Click to expand...

There are more Americans than English. Democracy!

755
 
overscan (PaulMM) said:
Apparently India will overtake the US in English speakers eventually. The UK is only 5th.
Click to expand...

Get ready for "Indian IT" to become the new standard of *English* English. The English themselves are probably already getting used to it, what with the English no longer being in the majority in their own capitol city. It's weird enough that the "center of the English language" long ago ceased to be the dominant power in determining what "proper" English is; now the language is being weeded out of London.

And it would not surprise me if *China* eventually has more English speakers than the US.
 
Orionblamblam said:
overscan (PaulMM) said:
Apparently India will overtake the US in English speakers eventually. The UK is only 5th.
Click to expand...

Get ready for "Indian IT" to become the new standard of *English* English. The English themselves are probably already getting used to it, what with the English no longer being in the majority in their own capitol city. It's weird enough that the "center of the English language" long ago ceased to be the dominant power in determining what "proper" English is; now the language is being weeded out of London.
Click to expand...

Despite the fact that London is a Global City, the English are not in any danger of being outnumbered in the capital city of the UK:

”London continued to be the region with the largest estimated proportion of non-UK-born (37%) and non-British (21%) population.”

It’s pretty much the same for another famous Global City: New York. Forty percent foreign-born.
 
starviking said:
Despite the fact that London is a Global City, the English are not in any danger of being outnumbered in the capital city of the UK:

”London continued to be the region with the largest estimated proportion of non-UK-born (37%) and non-British (21%) population.”
Click to expand...

37% + 21% = 58% non-English, meaning the English population has to be $2% or less. Meaning the English are outnumbered in London. Maybe, if London is no longer English but is instead a "Global City," the English should move their capitol somewhere else. Somewhere nice, like Rotherham. I hear interesting things.

Slightly off topic, I suppose. But only slightly. Perhaps this is why the US invades Brazil...
 
I mean, I don't care if it's off topic. To use an Italian saying "I don't have a stick up me arse" so deviating for a while. All of you are giving me advice and criticisim for free so I am the last person that should complain about it:D;)
TheRejectionist said:
CV12Hornet said:
TheRejectionist said:
  1. INVASION OF BRAZIL BY USA (mainly), FRANCE, UNITED KINGDOM (AND FEW OTHERS)
  2. CREATION OF A VICHY-STYLE PUPPET STATE
  3. CREATION OF AN CONGO-FREE-STATE-STYLE IN THE BRAZILIAN AMAZON
  4. POSSIBLY OCCUPATION OF THE COASTLINE AS WELL?
  5. RESISTANCE TO US OCCUPATION
  6. RUSSIAN-ISRAELI (few others too)COVERT COOPERATION TO HELP BRAZIL WITH WEAPONS AND VEHICLES
  7. NON-NUCLEAR CHINESE AMERICAN WAR
  8. BOTH OF THEM ARE K.O. afterwards
  9. INVASION FORCES CREATE AN HOLDOUT IN THE OCCUPIED BRAZILIAN AMAZON
  10. BRAZIL TAKES THE POSITION OF CHINA IN THE LUSOPHONE COUNTRIES AND THERE IS A SORT OF OVERSEAS FEDERATION (except Portugal)
  11. BRAZIL TRIES TO RECLAIM THE AMAZON
Click to expand...
Okay, so I'm going to speak mostly on combat aircraft here, since that's more my wheelhouse wrt to what you've outlined you need.

First, I recommend this Flight Global article for the inventories of the world's air forces in 2021 as a starting point: https://www.flightglobal.com/download?ac=75345

Alright, aircraft. As of 2040, I'd expect the backbone of Brazil's fast jet force to still be the Gripen E; given the capability of Brazil's aviation industry, and current local assembly of the Gripen E, full production capability is IMO in handwaving distance by 2040. Most of the rest of your little alliance should still be equipped with F-16s of varying vintages, with Angola and Venezuela still hanging onto their Flankers and there are probably a few squadrons of JF-17s floating around.

Once they band together, and start relying heavily on Russian and Israeli assistance, I'd expect more Gripens (with Russian engines and Israeli avionics replacing all the American gear, most likely) assuming the occupation doesn't wreck Brazil's aviation industry along the way; Brazil having a small high-end force of Su-57s; and everyone else having the Su-75 flogged their direction.
Click to expand...
No Mikoyan PAK DPs or PAK DAs?
Click to expand...
Now that we have the planes basics thanks to @CV12Hornet , do you guys have any suggestions for who to contact here (or even elsewhere) for making the design/drawings/or else (sorry for my limited vocubulary) of the potential planes ?
 
Apophenia said:
"I did the research and it felt the same way."

Then I must accept that we define 'research' quite differently.

"What's aping ?"

OED: gerund or present participle: Imitate the behavior or manner of (someone or something).

"... it is also the first time I am dealing with the subject at hand."

So you keep saying. And yet, based on your 'feelings', you reject suggestions by SPF members who are more experienced (in edwest2's case, that includes experienced in publishing).

"Are you being hard on me ?"

If you're still uncertain, the answer is Yes. But not to worry, I won't be back.
Click to expand...
Funny that a guy who claims he "did the research" has to ask what aping means rather than just google it...

Also, true research doesn't "feel" like anything, because it's objective and factual, not subjective or emotional.
 
Last edited:
No one can do another person's research. A book or story is not some puzzle that just needs a few missing pieces. I've spoken to prospective writers over the phone. I can 'see' their eyes glaze over when I mention mood and pacing and layering. They think that imagination is all they need to create a story worth reading. As an editor, I have to understand what I'm reading, and that means reading the research material that comes in. My company has an in-house library.

Today, Wikipedia is the go-to source. Quick and easy. Just quick and easy or it's not worth doing? For anyone who wants to see incompetent, incomplete and superficial knowledge on display, go here: https://www.janes.com/

Warning: Your eyes may glaze over as you discover that this is not the most desirable thing of all - Wikipedia.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't see the issue with some form of conceit to permit the premise. Afterall Red Flag gives threat forces basing rights near Las Vegas. That's not exactly realistic but they've been doing it for years!

If natural resources aren't sufficient to invade Brazil, how about to curb a Brazilian nuclear programme or eliminate terrorist training camps in the Amazon?

There have been some pretty flimsy pretexts in real life!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
edwest2 said:
Tropes? Hoo boy. Another word on my list of words to never use.
Click to expand...
I objectively like a couple those I mentioned.
martinbayer said:
Apophenia said:
"I did the research and it felt the same way."

Then I must accept that we define 'research' quite differently.

"What's aping ?"

OED: gerund or present participle: Imitate the behavior or manner of (someone or something).

"... it is also the first time I am dealing with the subject at hand."

So you keep saying. And yet, based on your 'feelings', you reject suggestions by SPF members who are more experienced (in edwest2's case, that includes experienced in publishing).

"Are you being hard on me ?"

If you're still uncertain, the answer is Yes. But not to worry, I won't be back.
Click to expand...
Funny that a guy who claims he "did the research" has to ask what aping means rather than just google it...

Also, true research doesn't "feel" like anything, because it's objective and factual, not subjective or emotional.
Click to expand...
edwest2 said:
No one can do another person's research. A book or story is not some puzzle that just needs a few missing pieces. I've spoken to prospective writers over the phone. I can 'see' their eyes glaze over when I mention mood and pacing and layering. They think that imagination is all they need to create a story worth reading. As an editor, I have to understand what I'm reading, and that means reading the research material that comes in. My company has an in-house library.

Today, Wikipedia is the go-to source. Quick and easy. Just quick and easy or it's not worth doing? For anyone who wants to see incompetent, incomplete and superficial knowledge on display, go here: https://www.janes.com/

Warning: Your eyes may glaze over as you discover that this is not the most desirable thing of all - Wikipedia.
Click to expand...

It's superficial...mostly because I have never done this kind of research, and that's why I am here. To receive genuine, unfiltered criticism (as it happening now) which is helpful as always.
As said, I am civilian, with no experience of engineering or similar, and I come from a field that is the most overrated in a lot of the parts of the world : the Humanities.

Opportunistic Minnow said:
I don't see the issue with some form of conceit to permit the premise. Afterall Red Flag gives threat forces basing rights near Las Vegas. That's not exactly realistic but they've been doing it for years!
Click to expand...
I genuinely thought it was fictional until I looked into it.
Opportunistic Minnow said:
If natural resources aren't sufficient to invade Brazil, how about to curb a Brazilian nuclear programme or eliminate terrorist training camps in the Amazon?

There have been some pretty flimsy pretexts in real life!
Click to expand...
I can agree with that, since the 1964 coup was planned under the Kennedys- John and Bob- (you can argue they were convinced just as Eisenhower was by Dulles and Churchill) under the fact they couldn't tolerate :

  1. A government that was very much anti-American in its composition
  2. A varied assortment of political diversity (communist,nationalist, conservative excetera) that shared the first point.
 
Rejectionist,

You can try. OK? On your own. Getting the 'quick' answers here will hot help you. Do you understand? I did some teaching, and while the majority of students understood the material some did not. That meant I had to go to each one and find different ways to present the material until they grasped it. Do you understand?

There's nothing wrong with asking questions, but you will learn nothing in the process. Get books about actual military operations and actual military equipment.
 
edwest2 said:
Rejectionist,

You can try. OK? On your own. Getting the 'quick' answers here will hot help you. Do you understand? I did some teaching, and while the majority of students understood the material some did not. That meant I had to go to each one and find different ways to present the material until they grasped it. Do you understand?
Click to expand...
I understand that you reply like a teacher yes.
edwest2 said:
There's nothing wrong with asking questions, but you will learn nothing in the process. Get books about actual military operations and actual military equipment.
Click to expand...
I am more asking for directions than questions. And more having a genuine discussion, but it feels like a waste of time for you I imagine?

@CV12Hornet did help a lot.
 
martinbayer said:
TheRejectionist said:
martinbayer said:
TheRejectionist said:
martinbayer said:
TheRejectionist said:
edwest2 said:
As far as I am concerned, Jane's publishes the best guides to military hardware. An example:

Jane's Aircraft Recognition Guide Fifth Edition: Gething, Michael J, Endres, Gunter: 9780061346194: Amazon.com: Books

Jane's Aircraft Recognition Guide Fifth Edition [Gething, Michael J, Endres, Gunter] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Jane's Aircraft Recognition Guide Fifth Edition
www.amazon.com
Click to expand...
It's rather,,, almost vintage ? And simplistic...
Click to expand...
Jane's yearbooks are published, well, annually, and come out on a wide range of platforms and systems, see https://www.janes.com/publications/janes-defence-intelligence-yearbooks. You can get a feel for the contents in an excerpt at https://planesandstuff.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/awains.pdf. Brace yourself for sticker shock though, so I'd recommend to look for recent editions in libraries accessible to you.
Click to expand...
I gave a look at their site...why it looks like a DoD website?
Click to expand...
I'd speculate that both organizations tend to focus on facts rather than flash, but note that Jane's got started in 1898, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janes_Information_Services, so they're not exactly an upstart, but a renown and respected brand.
Click to expand...

I am not saying it's an upstart. But it looks ...fishy. At least by just aesthetics.
Click to expand...
De gustibus non est disputandum. Or are you trying to insinuate that Jane's might be just a front for the DoD? Given the relative age of both organizations (which I why I provided info on the founding year of Jane's), and all other circumstances as well that would be a conspiracy theory worthy of Qanon. I understand you're an absolute beginner when it comes to aerospace and engineering, but even a modicum of elementary googling would go a long way to remedy complete ignorance - no offence. Otherwise it may come across like you're trying to outsource all the STEM aspects of Sci-Fi and simply focus on the (political) fiction.
Click to expand...
PS : No offence taken. I like genuine DIRECT criticism.
 
Orionblamblam said:
TheRejectionist said:
Orionblamblam said:
edwest2 said:
Not true. The U.S. has plenty but a lack of profit keeps them in the ground.
Click to expand...

Comes to it, it'll probably end up being cheaper to adsorb rare earths dissolved in seawater than launching a war of conquest in another hemisphere.
Click to expand...
I mean, how many trillions were wasted on the War on Terror?
Click to expand...

Wholly different sort of thing. A war to steal resources is going to be expensive and uncertain. Known extractable resources that don't need war (such as rare earths strained from seawater) might be more expensive than just the extraction of resources from the Amazon, but the constant expense of warfare will be a roughly calculable and definitely troublesome added expense. The "War on Some Terror" was not about a cheaper way to obtain resources, but to put down awful ideologies. How much would the US spend militarily to extract one metric ton of petroleum from, say, Iran? Not a dime. How much would the US spend militarily to bitchslap Iran if the Iranians, say, assassinated the President? Oh, a *whole* lot. Revenge is a dish best served expensively.
Click to expand...

May I suggest that the smarter politicians and corporations know how to separate military costs from resource extraction costs?
Back during the 1920s and 1930s, the (USA-based) United Fruit Company used the United States Marine Corps to push their corporate interests in Central and South America.
On the flip side, Kellog, Root and Brown turned a tidy profit providing secondary services (room and board and logistics) to Coalition Forces fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
So the corporation profiting from resource extraction may not be paying for security services.
 
riggerrob said:
Orionblamblam said:
TheRejectionist said:
Orionblamblam said:
edwest2 said:
Not true. The U.S. has plenty but a lack of profit keeps them in the ground.
Click to expand...

Comes to it, it'll probably end up being cheaper to adsorb rare earths dissolved in seawater than launching a war of conquest in another hemisphere.
Click to expand...
I mean, how many trillions were wasted on the War on Terror?
Click to expand...

Wholly different sort of thing. A war to steal resources is going to be expensive and uncertain. Known extractable resources that don't need war (such as rare earths strained from seawater) might be more expensive than just the extraction of resources from the Amazon, but the constant expense of warfare will be a roughly calculable and definitely troublesome added expense. The "War on Some Terror" was not about a cheaper way to obtain resources, but to put down awful ideologies. How much would the US spend militarily to extract one metric ton of petroleum from, say, Iran? Not a dime. How much would the US spend militarily to bitchslap Iran if the Iranians, say, assassinated the President? Oh, a *whole* lot. Revenge is a dish best served expensively.
Click to expand...

May I suggest that the smarter politicians and corporations know how to separate military costs from resource extraction costs?
Back during the 1920s and 1930s, the (USA-based) United Fruit Company used the United States Marine Corps to push their corporate interests in Central and South America.
On the flip side, Kellog, Root and Brown turned a tidy profit providing secondary services (room and board and logistics) to Coalition Forces fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
So the corporation profiting from resource extraction may not be paying for security services.
Click to expand...
I had totally forgotten that the UF involvement in Central America.
Thanks !

And I just added two products to not buy from!

Thanks again.
 
riggerrob said:
May I suggest that the smarter politicians and corporations know how to separate military costs from resource extraction costs?
Back during the 1920s and 1930s, the (USA-based) United Fruit Company used the United States Marine Corps to push their corporate interests in Central and South America.
Click to expand...
Right - USMC Major General Smedley Butler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler and his book War Is A Racket https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=inu.32000014248506&view=1up&seq=1&skin=2021 come to mind.
 
Last edited:
martinbayer said:
riggerrob said:

May I suggest that the smarter politicians and corporations know how to separate military costs from resource extraction costs?
Back during the 1920s and 1930s, the (USA-based) United Fruit Company used the United States Marine Corps to push their corporate interests in Central and South America.
On the flip side, Kellog, Root and Brown turned a tidy profit providing secondary services (room and board and logistics) to Coalition Forces fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
So the corporation profiting from resource extraction may not be paying for security services.
Click to expand...
Right - Smedley Butler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler and his book War Is A Racket https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=inu.32000014248506&view=1up&seq=64 come to mind.
Click to expand...
This guy was the one who was asked to join the Business Plot or I am remembering uncorrectly?
 
TheRejectionist said:
martinbayer said:
riggerrob said:

May I suggest that the smarter politicians and corporations know how to separate military costs from resource extraction costs?
Back during the 1920s and 1930s, the (USA-based) United Fruit Company used the United States Marine Corps to push their corporate interests in Central and South America.
On the flip side, Kellog, Root and Brown turned a tidy profit providing secondary services (room and board and logistics) to Coalition Forces fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
So the corporation profiting from resource extraction may not be paying for security services.
Click to expand...
Right - Smedley Butler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler and his book War Is A Racket https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=inu.32000014248506&view=1up&seq=64 come to mind.
Click to expand...
This guy was the one who was asked to join the Business Plot or I am remembering uncorrectly?
Click to expand...
Yup - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot.
 
martinbayer said:
TheRejectionist said:
martinbayer said:
riggerrob said:

May I suggest that the smarter politicians and corporations know how to separate military costs from resource extraction costs?
Back during the 1920s and 1930s, the (USA-based) United Fruit Company used the United States Marine Corps to push their corporate interests in Central and South America.
On the flip side, Kellog, Root and Brown turned a tidy profit providing secondary services (room and board and logistics) to Coalition Forces fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
So the corporation profiting from resource extraction may not be paying for security services.
Click to expand...
Right - Smedley Butler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler and his book War Is A Racket https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=inu.32000014248506&view=1up&seq=64 come to mind.
Click to expand...
This guy was the one who was asked to join the Business Plot or I am remembering uncorrectly?
Click to expand...
Yup - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot.
Click to expand...
Funny that he was like "lol no" to the presumed conspirators.
 
Orionblamblam said:
starviking said:
Despite the fact that London is a Global City, the English are not in any danger of being outnumbered in the capital city of the UK:

”London continued to be the region with the largest estimated proportion of non-UK-born (37%) and non-British (21%) population.”
Click to expand...

37% + 21% = 58% non-English, meaning the English population has to be $2% or less. Meaning the English are outnumbered in London. Maybe, if London is no longer English but is instead a "Global City," the English should move their capitol somewhere else. Somewhere nice, like Rotherham. I hear interesting things.
Click to expand...
I think you’re going the wrong way with your calculation:

37% - 21% = 16% non-UK-born British citizens.
 
starviking said:
Just dipping a toe in here.

My advice is to get copies of the roleplaying game Twilight 2000, and its supplement Merc 2000.

It shows how to make a believable setting where the Cold War went hot (or in the case of Merc 2000 - warm) in the near future. For the games it was near future, as it was published in the mid-80s, and extrapolated credible events in the 90s leading to nuclear war.

You might be able to get the setting info just off the web - but if not digital versions are available for good prices.
Click to expand...
Had trouble finding...I guess it's almost vintage?
 
riggerrob said:
May I suggest that the smarter politicians and corporations know how to separate military costs from resource extraction costs?
Back during the 1920s and 1930s, the (USA-based) United Fruit Company used the United States Marine Corps to push their corporate interests in Central and South America.
On the flip side, Kellog, Root and Brown turned a tidy profit providing secondary services (room and board and logistics) to Coalition Forces fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
So the corporation profiting from resource extraction may not be paying for security services.
Click to expand...

The Typical US Imperial behaviour since "evil" presidency of Woodrow Wilson
This went in Cold War to new level as US military action was replaced by CIA operations
we're US "Friendly" Governments were installed, who were not democratic and merely secure US business interests.
and to give this really nasty twist,
Some of US politicians and CIA directors behind this operations, were CEO or Shareholder of companies like United Fruit Company
I look at you Bob Dole and Allen Dulles...
 
TheRejectionist said:
starviking said:
Just dipping a toe in here.

My advice is to get copies of the roleplaying game Twilight 2000, and its supplement Merc 2000.

It shows how to make a believable setting where the Cold War went hot (or in the case of Merc 2000 - warm) in the near future. For the games it was near future, as it was published in the mid-80s, and extrapolated credible events in the 90s leading to nuclear war.

You might be able to get the setting info just off the web - but if not digital versions are available for good prices.
Click to expand...
Had trouble finding...I guess it's almost vintage?
Click to expand...
Depends on definitions - 1984.
 
As far as those games, not much has changed. They were based on actual research and less on imagination.
 
starviking said:
TheRejectionist said:
starviking said:
Just dipping a toe in here.

My advice is to get copies of the roleplaying game Twilight 2000, and its supplement Merc 2000.

It shows how to make a believable setting where the Cold War went hot (or in the case of Merc 2000 - warm) in the near future. For the games it was near future, as it was published in the mid-80s, and extrapolated credible events in the 90s leading to nuclear war.

You might be able to get the setting info just off the web - but if not digital versions are available for good prices.
Click to expand...
Had trouble finding...I guess it's almost vintage?
Click to expand...
Depends on definitions - 1984.
Click to expand...
So, I am millenial. That stuff is 12 years older than me.
edwest2 said:
As far as those games, not much has changed. They were based on actual research and less on imagination.
Click to expand...
So I guess that's why @starviking recommended them?
 
So a bit of a recap :

As suggested by @CV12Hornet
  1. Gripen with
  2. Israeli Avionics
  3. Russian Jet engine or
  4. Japanese Jet engine as suggested by @overscan (PaulMM)
I like the sound of it !

On the off topic : first you guys talk about pollution, then China, then what's the best English ;)

On the last one I can comment as an Humanities student and civilian :
  1. Barbados
  2. Nigerian
  3. Texan
  4. Jamaican
  5. Israeli-accent English
 

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom