Jaycee Woods

Prompt: If a howitzer were installed on to a speed boat, could the boat withstand the force of firing the howitzer? If not, what larger size boat would be needed that might be available in a commercial fleet? A barge?

Copilot said: Installing a howitzer on a speed boat would likely be problematic due to the significant recoil force generated when firing. Speed boats are generally lightweight and not designed to handle such powerful forces, which could result in structural damage or instability.

For a more suitable platform, you would need a larger and more stable vessel. Here are some options:

Barge: A barge is a good candidate due to its flat, stable platform and ability to carry heavy loads. Barges are commonly used in commercial fleets and can be adapted to support heavy artillery like a howitzer.

Landing Craft: Military landing crafts are designed to carry heavy equipment and can be used for amphibious operations. They offer a stable platform and are built to handle the recoil of large weapons.

Tugboats: These are robust and powerful vessels used in commercial operations. They have the structural integrity to support heavy equipment and can be modified to mount a howitzer.

Fishing Trawlers: Larger fishing boats, such as trawlers, have the necessary stability and deck space to accommodate a howitzer. They are also common in commercial fleets and can be adapted for military use.

Historically, the Dahlgren boat howitzers were designed for use on larger boats and landing crafts, which provided the necessary stability and support.

Prompt: So, in a speedboat, mortars would make more sense?

Copilot said: Yes, using mortars on a speedboat would make more sense compared to a howitzer. Mortars are generally lighter and have less recoil, making them more suitable for smaller, less stable platforms like speedboats. Here are a few reasons why mortars are a better fit:

Reduced Recoil: Mortars have significantly less recoil than howitzers, which reduces the risk of damaging the boat or causing instability.

Portability: Mortars are more portable and easier to mount on smaller vessels. They can be quickly set up and used without extensive modifications to the boat.

Versatility: Mortars can be used for indirect fire, allowing the boat to remain at a safe distance while still engaging targets effectively.

Ease of Use: Mortars are simpler to operate and maintain, which is advantageous in the field where resources and time may be limited. Using mortars on a speedboat can provide a mobile and flexible fire support platform, ideal for hit-and-run tactics or supporting amphibious operations.

Prompt: To create the equivalent of a PT boat retrofit with torpedoes, what type of commercial boat would be appropriate?

Copilot said: To retrofit a commercial boat with torpedoes, you’ll need a vessel that offers stability, speed, and enough deck space to accommodate the necessary equipment. Here are some suitable types of commercial boats:

Fishing Trawlers: These boats are robust and have ample deck space, making them suitable for mounting torpedo launchers. They are also relatively fast and can handle rough waters.

Workboats: These versatile vessels are used in various industries, including construction and oil exploration. They are built to be durable and can be modified to carry heavy equipment like torpedoes.

Yachts: Larger yachts, especially those designed for high-speed travel, can be retrofitted with torpedo launchers. They offer a good balance of speed and stability.

Patrol Boats: Commercial patrol boats, often used by coast guards and private security firms, are designed for speed and maneuverability. They can be adapted for military use with the addition of torpedo launchers.

Barges: While not typically fast, barges provide a stable platform and can carry heavy loads. They can be used in scenarios where speed is less critical but stability and carrying capacity are essential. Historically, PT boats (Patrol Torpedo boats) were small, fast, and agile, designed to deliver torpedoes against larger surface vessels. Modern equivalents would need to balance these characteristics with the practicalities of retrofitting commercial vessels.

Prompt: Assuming an urban rebel army of conscripts, they are unlikely to understand the mortars are a small-scale attack if they have never experienced a howitzer, correct? To them it is still an unexpectedly big explosion, correct?

Copilot said: Yes, that’s correct. For an urban rebel army composed of conscripts who have never experienced a howitzer, the explosions from mortars would still seem significant and potentially overwhelming. Here are a few reasons why:

Lack of Experience: Without prior exposure to larger artillery like howitzers, the conscripts would have no frame of reference to compare the scale of the explosions. Mortar fire would likely be perceived as a major threat.

Psychological Impact: The sudden and loud explosions from mortars can have a strong psychological impact, especially on inexperienced fighters. The noise, shockwaves, and destruction caused by mortars can create fear and confusion.

Perceived Threat: Even though mortars are smaller in scale compared to howitzers, they are still capable of causing significant damage and casualties. To the conscripts, the distinction between different types of artillery may not be clear, and any explosive attack would be seen as a serious danger.

Urban Environment: In an urban setting, the confined spaces and structures can amplify the effects of mortar explosions, making them seem even more powerful. The destruction of buildings and infrastructure can add to the perceived severity of the attack. Using mortars in this context can effectively create the impression of a substantial and intimidating assault, even if it is not on the same scale as a howitzer barrage.

Prompt: These urban rebel conscripts would be unlikely to know that large warships are ban in the Great Lakes, correct? So, a psyop might trick them into believing that battleships, destroyers, and heavy cruisers were coming their way?

Copilot said: Yes, that’s correct. The urban rebel conscripts are likely to be unaware of the historical and legal restrictions on large warships in the Great Lakes, such as those imposed by the Rush–Bagot Treaty of 1818. This lack of knowledge can be exploited in a psychological operation (PsyOps) to create the illusion of an impending naval invasion by battleships, destroyers, and heavy cruisers. Here are some tactics to enhance this deception:

False Communications: Broadcast fake radio transmissions suggesting the arrival and movements of large naval forces. This can include orders, status updates, and even distress signals to add authenticity.

Visual Deception: Use inflatable decoys or other visual tricks to simulate the presence of large ships on the lake. These can be placed strategically to be seen from a distance, especially at dawn or dusk.

Sound Effects: Play recorded sounds of naval engines, water splashing, and other maritime activities from hidden speakers along the shore.

Light Signals: Use signal lights or flares to mimic naval communication and movements, creating the impression of coordination between multiple vessels.

Smoke and Mirrors: Create smoke screens on the water to obscure visibility and suggest the presence of a larger force. This can be done using smoke grenades or other devices.

Dummy Equipment: Place fake naval equipment, such as radar dishes or antennas, on the shore to suggest a support base for the supposed naval forces. By combining these tactics, you can effectively manipulate the enemy into believing that a significant naval threat is imminent, potentially causing them to divert resources and attention away from other critical areas.