Iron Man: Fatal Frontier #13

[arbre_rieur]

"Shockworker was one of my favorite parts of the original story idea. File him next to all the other poetic and sad robots I seem to populate the MU with. He's really charming and very sad." -- Kieron Gillen

(Note: Keep in mind that this is one of Marvel's online Infinite Comics. They're designed to be read on a digital device, with each page replacing the previous one on your screen. When the pages are instead side-by-side, stacked vertically, like in this post, it can make for an awkward reading experience. Also, the format makes page count a tricky matter, but if you count each "slide" as a page, then this is under 1/3 of the issue.)

Udarnik is about to use the existing phlogistone to convert all of the Moon's iron ore into more phlogistone. Still going crazy, Tony Stark experiences a series of hallucinations, showing him different ways the current situation can play out.

Hallucination 1: Udarnik succeeds.









Hallucination 2: Tony can use the powers of the Endotherm armor. When Udarnik's thousands of drones attack him, he can convert all their electricity into heat.





Hallucination 3: Tony can use the Endotherm armor in reverse, convert all the heat in the environment, freeze everything up.



All seems hopeless, but then he has a vision of Ho Yinsen, who shows him a different way.

























Dr. Doom's cosmic power stealer, installed in the Iron Man armor, gets to work on the phlogistone supply.



Without phlogistone, there's no reason for people to stay on the Moon. Within one month, Tranquility City nee Tranquility Gulch has become a ghost town, with Tony as its last, lone resident.

Comments

[icon_uk]

Without phlogistone, there's no reason for people to stay on the Moon

Ready built industrial facilities in lower gravity and NO ONE can think of a purpose for them? Never mind the possible military applications?

That's... a sad reflection on humanity in the MU.

[sadoeuphemist]

I think space industry science is based around zero gravity, as in orbital space stations. I don't think the difference in gravity in the moon is significant enough to radically alter any industrial processes, and shipping materials back and forth between Earth would negate any advantages.

Also what on earth are the military applications of being on the moon?

[icon_uk]

The military application that springs to mind immediately would be surveillance. No more relying on satellites all the time when you're on THE satellite and would have complete coverage of the world's surface every 24 hours. (Not for the entire 24 hours obviously)

Also complete planetary coverage with any weapons platforms you built there.

And in the MU, early warning station for incursions wouldn't be a bad idea. We know they have satellites further out (Whatever one Living Lightning was spending his time on a while back) but one in constant Earth orbit couldn't hurt.

[freezer]

Not to mention that the nations currently running the International Space Station would certainly jump at the chance to take over a permanent moon base.

[sadoeuphemist]

Aren't satellites infinitely more convenient for surveillance and/or weapons platforms than a moon base because a) they're actually closer to Earth and b) you actually have control over their positioning.

I mean there's a reason why we, in the real world, use satellite imaging instead of just leaving a bunch of cameras on the moon and relying on those.

[icon_uk]

You may well be right, though I suspect that a part of that is that we don't have a cost effective method of lunar travel, which the MU definitely should have by now.

Also, if we're talking an energy weapon (rather than missiles) of the sort that the MU also should have by now (Judging by the number of pocket sized energy blasters there are around the place) the distance would be inconsequential to something travelling at the speed of light, and the lack of manouverability might be offset by the benefits of having human operators able to maintain and service it from a stable moonbase.

I confess that planning the militarisation of the moon isn't something that has occupied much of my time... which probably speaks ill of my plans for ultimate global domination.

[sadoeuphemist]

No, I mean the side of Earth that you can monitor at any given time is a) entirely predictable to anyone and b) completely out of your control. Whereas you can send up a satellite in geosynchronous orbit directly over the area you are interested in surveilling/bombarding the hell out of. You can alter the satellite's orbit to have it move over to a different spot. You can have a space station with human operators to do the same thing.

Lunar travel is not inherently more difficult than launching space stations into orbit. Humanity got to the moon before we had a space station. It just has no advantages, and I have no idea what you think they are. A base in the airless environment of the moon is not any more convenient or stable to maintain than an orbital space station.

[icon_uk]

Satellites could still be used in specific instances, but a moon base could be built to operate underground, and could thus be larger and more durable than a fragile space station, especially in the junk littered orbits around earth.

Also, if the moon does contain sources of water, in the form of ice, then that would be a significant advantage.

[sadoeuphemist]

What good would a surveillance station/missile array be underground??? Why would lunar water matter outside of long-term habitation? We're talking about building a military base where everything is shipped in, not colonization.

Your logic is totally bizarre to me. It's like saying, it's preferable to build a base on top of a mountain so that you can see everything and launch attacks from up high. As opposed to just building a bunch of airplanes. If you want to surveil something or deliver ordinance, it's infinitely more inconvenient to do everything from a fixed point miles away from everything, as opposed to mobile units that can be positioned where you want them.

[icon_uk]

What good would a surveillance station/missile array be underground???

Because there's a significant difference between the actual surveillance technology, and the habitation required for humans. The equipment can be on the surface, the people who monitor and maintain it can be underground until required to go above.

And again, missiles kept in underground silos so they could be maintained more easily than those above ground. If the silo's are pressurised then they can be accessed by staff without heavily environmental gear.

This isn't even a radical idea I'm proposing, underground lunar bases have been seriously examined for decades. They would be more labour intensive in their creation, but would provide better protection against radiation and air leaks than more exposed above ground bases (Though a combination of the two concepts, of building an above ground base and then covering it with lunar soil, essentially turning it into an underground base is another possibility)

Why would lunar water matter outside of long-term habitation? We're talking about building a military base where everything is shipped in, not colonization.

Long term habitation would be the whole point of the project, so of course it would matter. If you don't need to ship in water, then you're already at an advantage.

Your logic is totally bizarre to me.

That doesn't make it any less logical.

It's like saying, it's preferable to build a base on top of a mountain so that you can see everything and launch attacks from up high. As opposed to just building a bunch of airplanes.

To use your analogy, aeroplanes require fuel to keep them in the air and are significantly slower and more fragile than a mountaintop observation station which can cover the same area instantly. Planes can be grounded by bad weather, or barred from flying over certain airspaces. Keeping some would be a sensible move of course, but relying on them completely when you have the alternative seems short sighted.

If you want to surveil something or deliver ordinance, it's infinitely more inconvenient to do everything from a fixed point miles away from everything, as opposed to mobile units that can be positioned where you want them.

If the unit miles away has got a significant improvement on the area that can be surveilled/covered in an effective and timely manner, which would be the case (Covering half the world at any given moment), then I don't really see your argument being that valid since moving your planes elsewhere would take time and not necessarily be possible for any number of practical or political reasons.

Setting up a spy station on the moon would be a political nightmare of course, and we have the Outer Space Treaty in the real world forbidding the placing of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons on the moon or in earth orbits in the first place, but I have no idea if the MU has such a thing.

[sadoeuphemist]

What would the point even be of lunar missile silos, when we are already perfectly capable of launching nuclear strikes from bases right here on Earth? To make the missiles take longer to reach their target and to delay communication as to when and if they should be launched? Lunar missile sites are born of the same Cold War/Space Race paranoia that conceived of the Davy Crockett nuclear recoilless rifle - ie, a bad idea.

I cannot believe that you are seriously proposing moutaintop observatories as substitutes for planes. With aerial observation or satellite imaging, you can track a car going along city streets, or keep track of who goes in an out of a building. You cannot do this from an observatory, because all the buildings will be blocking your view. Any satellite, even an installation on the moon, has the same limitations. You will be able to see in detail what is going on directly below you, but beyond that radius your view will be blocked by manmade and natural formations and the natural curvature of the Earth. You do not surveil something effectively by sitting far away as possible to see the whole thing at once.

[icon_uk]

I cannot believe that you are seriously proposing moutaintop observatories as substitutes for planes.

I'm not seriously suggesting it, I was replying to your stated analogy, which I presumed had to factor in a sufficiently increased coverage from the mountaintop to make it a relevant factor in the comparison.

[sadoeuphemist]

Your coverage is not sufficiently increased! You may be able to see a whole city from a mountaintop, but you cannot see in detail what is going on in the streets because most of your view is at an angle. If you want to know what is going on down there or if you have a specific target you should fly directly overhead to get a good view. That was the entire point of the comparison!

[md84]

On the bright side, it looks like Udarnik doesn't mind being alone anymore, if only because he won't have to deal with people like Tony Stark.

We all knew this wasn't going to have a really happy ending with a title like "Fatal Frontier", but man this was depressing.

[tpsreports]

Holy crap, tides on 616 Earth must be hell because look how close the moon is to the Earth.

[freezer]

There's probably a deeper profound meaning here, floating within the sea of "Tony Stark is a dick," but damn if I can find it.

[md84]

Did we really need a thirteen issue story to remind us that Tony can be kind of a jerk? What next? A story about how the Red Skull is a bad man? Or Spider-man is unlucky? Or Bruce Banner has anger issues?

[thosefew]

Carving "Tony Stark is a dick" into the moon's surface is Udarnik's new job.

[matrix_dragon]

So, humanity goes into space, then turns right back around and goes to Earth because there was nothing interesting out there but a plot device so it's boring now. What.

[arilou_skiff]

The weird thing is they KNOW space is full of interesting stuff.

Mainly stuff that wants to kill/enslave humans, true, but it's not boring!

[drtechnobabel]

Honestly, I kind of liked this ending. Tony actually managing to talk Udarnik down was a pleasant surprise for me, and I thought, 'Oh cool, Tony's actually doing something both intelligent and heroic'. Then Tony shot Udarnik for no real reason other than to... keep him out of the way, I guess? Even though Udarnik already surrendered. At least Tony admits he was being a dick to everyone, and Udarnik decided not to take any more shit from Tony after he was rebuilt.

As for abandoning the moon colony, I expected it, though I still don't know why they didn't make it a military outpost. But hey, at least the idea of a tourist spot or mining colony was entertained. All in all, this ending fits my opinion on the rest of the series: okay overall. Some parts good, some parts bad, and ultimately self-contained.

[featheredserpent]

This whole continuity is utterly divorced from everything we know about the MU. I'm just sadly disappointed.

[misanthr0pe]

There is so much bad science in that first hallucination/scenario.