Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
db_zero

Who Would have Guessed This 12 years Ago

Recommended Posts

That has actually been discussed. I'm all for it. Give me something different.

The jolly old UK has just been gutted too hard and too totally. The RN today should have Nelson rolling in his grave. The decision to not include a CATOBAR system on their new carriers (if the second one is even commissioned) when the F-35B goes tits up will bite them in the ass, and they can't afford to send any reasonable surface group out. Hell if memory serves, when the Kuznetsov group (itself a joke of a platform) dawdled off Scotland, the UK had all of one destroyer in home waters. That happened to be in the English channel, so talk about a serious shortage. It's sad really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That has actually been discussed. I'm all for it. Give me something different.

The jolly old UK has just been gutted too hard and too totally. The RN today should have Nelson rolling in his grave. The decision to not include a CATOBAR system on their new carriers (if the second one is even commissioned) when the F-35B goes tits up will bite them in the ass, and they can't afford to send any reasonable surface group out. Hell if memory serves, when the Kuznetsov group (itself a joke of a platform) dawdled off Scotland, the UK had all of one destroyer in home waters. That happened to be in the English channel, so talk about a serious shortage. It's sad really.

You make it sound like if push came to shove the French Navy might be put into a position of defending the British Isles. I do find it odd and disturbing that radical Islamic Imams are alowed to preach destruction of a host national that welcomed them and provide government assistance. Don't know if that's true in fact or just media sensationalism.

Edited by db_zero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: The French Navy

Distinctly possible, but unlikely. The thing is no one besides the US or France can sortie a fighting force capable of projecting real power over distance. The Russian Navy is in sorry shape (Kuznetsov task forces always sail with a tug because the carrier keeps breaking) and China can't project a meaningful fleet that far, yet. So the RN could handle pretty much anything that could conceivably come (thanks to some excellent submarine forces) until the US or France showed up. England doesn't have any Maritime Patrol aircraft anymore, so even land based support wouldn't help much.

Edited by Codename Duchess

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: The French Navy

Distinctly possible, but unlikely. The thing is no one besides the US or France can sortie a fighting force capable of projecting real power over distance. The Russian Navy is in sorry shape (Kuznetsov task forces always sail with a tug because the carrier keeps breaking) and China can't project a meaningful fleet that far, yet. So the RN could handle pretty much anything that could conceivably come (thanks to some excellent submarine forces) until the US or France showed up. England doesn't have any Maritime Patrol aircraft anymore, so even land based support wouldn't help much.

Interesting you mentioned submarines. In Asia especially with smaller nations like Viet-Nam, Phillipines and other players there is a naval arms race taking place centered around submarines-and if I'm not mistaken many powerful Western naval forces have been emphasing projecting combat power onshore to land at the expense of ASW capability.

Edited by db_zero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ASW has atrophied worldwide in all nations (except those that never had it, China being the big one). Fortunately for the US, our submarine fleet is huge, the best in the world, and never did stop practicing. Virginia Class Submarines would be the real heroes in any upcoming war. The real degradation has been in anti surface warfare capabilities in Western Navies, which is only recently being remedied. Lamentable but forgivable as until the recent rise of the PLAN there has been no need for ASUW or ASW. A lot of guys have to learn some long forgotten skills. Fortunately from my talks with bubbleheads and Maritime Patrol guys, non-Western ASW is laughably bad. That doesn't mean a lucky D-E boat can't cause a lot of problems though. Which is why we leased a Swedish one for a couple years to practice with.

I'm all for smaller Asian navies growing their sub forces. Its the best way to counter a certain rising Asian power. There was even some strong arguments made by naval analysts to lease out some LA class boats to Australia, which in my eyes would be a great choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: The French Navy

Distinctly possible, but unlikely. The thing is no one besides the US or France can sortie a fighting force capable of projecting real power over distance. The Russian Navy is in sorry shape (Kuznetsov task forces always sail with a tug because the carrier keeps breaking) and China can't project a meaningful fleet that far, yet.

 

I didn't realize they'd invented time travel, because that is some seriously outdated info.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't realize they'd invented time travel, because that is some seriously outdated info.

*shhh*! We're having a fact-free nationalistic circle-jerk. Please do not intrude with your so-called "reality", or I'll set Kettler on you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL... headbang_zps38ixjbeu.gif'Murica!

Otoh at times though, some of the social/economical/political discussians here are not bad at all. Personally I think it's better than BF's games benefic/cost wise. :D

 

Mil techs, combat doctrines, equipment documents.. nah, seems the knowledge base is just average.

Edited by Skwabie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't realize they'd invented time travel, because that is some seriously outdated info.

As outdated as it's most recent deployment in May of 2014?

"As well as the Kuznetsov, the task group included the Kirov Class nuclear powered battle cruiser Pyotr Velikiy; three tankers; Segey Osipov, Kama and Dubna; one Ocean-going Tug Altay and the Landing Support Ship Minsk."

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-latest-activity/news/2014/may/08/140508-russian-task-group

Edit: Are you the same Apocal who plays CMAN:O?

Edited by Codename Duchess

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As outdated as it's most recent deployment in May of 2014?

"As well as the Kuznetsov, the task group included the Kirov Class nuclear powered battle cruiser Pyotr Velikiy; three tankers; Segey Osipov, Kama and Dubna; one Ocean-going Tug Altay and the Landing Support Ship Minsk."

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-latest-activity/news/2014/may/08/140508-russian-task-group

Edit: Are you the same Apocal who plays CMAN:O?

 

Yes, I'm the same Apocal. And the outdated part is "because it is so unreliable," the Russians are just paranoid about other people's tugs handling their precious carrier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your AARs are top notch, the Shurikens were a nice touch.

It doesn't strike you as odd that the pride of the fleet always has a tug? Steam Plants are old but they're not that unreliable if well maintained. From my understanding the boilers were not replaced in the most recent overhaul.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kuznetsov is badly in need of an overhaul, its in such a poor state being assigned to it is considered a form of punishment. Also its fighter wing was supposed to be replaced with Mig-29ks to replace su-33 which is past the projected end of its service life but that never happened, as angry Slavic Mexico has no money to spend on non submarine projects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your AARs are top notch, the Shurikens were a nice touch.

It doesn't strike you as odd that the pride of the fleet always has a tug? Steam Plants are old but they're not that unreliable if well maintained. From my understanding the boilers were not replaced in the most recent overhaul.

 

Thanks.

 

It does strike me as odd. The Kuznetov was incredibly unreliable, but that was years ago and last we saw of her, she wasn't going dead in the water anymore. Her whole steam plant was supposed to come out, to be replaced by a gas turbine setup (IIRC) but for whatever reason didn't happen. Its possible they just ran out of money, its possible they just figured out what in her steam plant was giving them so much grief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The two primary support vessels - "Fotiy Krylov" and "Nikolay Chiker" are not simple tugs, they also provide surface and underwater rescue, firefighting and medical assistance capabilities. Both were introduced before "AFSU Kuznetsov" went into trials, and were planned to accompany heavy cruisers from the start. The reason that they and other similar vessels are included into fleet groups is not the mechanical reliability of the ships in general (though it did suffer greatly in '90s and early '00s, the things have been steadily improving for the last decade), but the fact that if something does happen, the fleet would not have anybody but themselves to rely on thousands of miles away from their base (whereas NATO vessels can use the extensive network of American and America-aligned bases around the world).

Also, it would perhaps be worth noting that project 1143.5 is not really an aircraft carrier, but a missile cruiser that happens to have a few airplanes to reinforce the group's air defenses somewhat (though the planned overhaul (that gets constantly delayed due to the need to have the vessel demonstrate the presence in Mediterranean near the coast of Syria for the past few years) might see the ASMs replaced by additional hangars and storage compartments to increase the carried air wing; further indication is that though the first batch of ordered MiG-29Ks is already delivered, the Su-33s that they are supposed to replace seem set to receive an overhaul too and keep serving alongside their lighter counterparts as originally intended). In general, the Soviet (and therefore Russian) navy was always doctrinally and ideologically oriented for anti-ship and anti-submarine warfare, with "power projection" believed to be the province of the Western fleets (the expression being "the aircraft carrier is the weapon of aggressive imperialism"), though recently Russian navy has been increasing its anti-shore capabilities with several cruise missile-carrying platforms.

Edited by Krasnoarmeyets

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ASW has atrophied worldwide in all nations (except those that never had it, China being the big one). Fortunately for the US, our submarine fleet is huge, the best in the world, and never did stop practicing. Virginia Class Submarines would be the real heroes in any upcoming war. The real degradation has been in anti surface warfare capabilities in Western Navies, which is only recently being remedied. Lamentable but forgivable as until the recent rise of the PLAN there has been no need for ASUW or ASW. A lot of guys have to learn some long forgotten skills. Fortunately from my talks with bubbleheads and Maritime Patrol guys, non-Western ASW is laughably bad. That doesn't mean a lucky D-E boat can't cause a lot of problems though. Which is why we leased a Swedish one for a couple years to practice with.

I'm all for smaller Asian navies growing their sub forces. Its the best way to counter a certain rising Asian power. There was even some strong arguments made by naval analysts to lease out some LA class boats to Australia, which in my eyes would be a great choice.

I was toying around in CMNO a while back as was surprised when my Arleigh Burke had no Harpoons, Tomahawks and Sm2s couldn't target enemy surface units. Only had a Seahawk with Hellfires which was vulnerable to SAMs and losing it would have reduced my ASW capabilities considerably. So sounds like its true the surface warfare capabilty has been drastically reduced.

 

Many believe in an all out war the SSNs are the real capitial ships. The diesel/electric subs being purchased in Asia are supposedly very quiet and potentially very deadly. Don't know how competent and well trained the crews are, but one would think a well commanded diesel sub could really cause problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SM2s can target ships in Command. There is a switch you have to throw to make it happen by default. I believe Tomahawks were removed from Aegis and Burkes a while ago.

I thought only certain models of the SM2 have SSM capabilities while other flughts are not SSM capable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was toying around in CMNO a while back as was surprised when my Arleigh Burke had no Harpoons, Tomahawks and Sm2s couldn't target enemy surface units. Only had a Seahawk with Hellfires which was vulnerable to SAMs and losing it would have reduced my ASW capabilities considerably. So sounds like its true the surface warfare capabilty has been drastically reduced.

 

Many believe in an all out war the SSNs are the real capitial ships. The diesel/electric subs being purchased in Asia are supposedly very quiet and potentially very deadly. Don't know how competent and well trained the crews are, but one would think a well commanded diesel sub could really cause problems.

 

Burkes should still have Tomahawks, just not the anti-ship version of Tomahawk. The late-model ones don't have Harpoons, but that's because the surface navy didn't want to shell out bucks for keeping Harpoons relevant during the nineties budget crunch. The air navy did, which is why they had (have) the SLAM-ER on their birds and that's where most of our anti-ship capability currently resides. Submarines are cool and work in some circumstances and we do have a lot of them, but based on what I saw during the last decade, if any serious war pops off, they're going to have better things to do than dedicated themselves to popping surface ships... unless those surface ships are trying to sortie from a monitored port.

 

That is changing in the very near-term, but for now, if you want to see how the USN would mallet a bunch of ships, use a carrier's airwing with P-3/P-8/MQ-4C support for surveillance and maybe the White Cloud constellation for additional ELINT capability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Burkes should still have Tomahawks, just not the anti-ship version of Tomahawk. The late-model ones don't have Harpoons, but that's because the surface navy didn't want to shell out bucks for keeping Harpoons relevant during the nineties budget crunch. The air navy did, which is why they had (have) the SLAM-ER on their birds and that's where most of our anti-ship capability currently resides. Submarines are cool and work in some circumstances and we do have a lot of them, but based on what I saw during the last decade, if any serious war pops off, they're going to have better things to do than dedicated themselves to popping surface ships... unless those surface ships are trying to sortie from a monitored port.

That is changing in the very near-term, but for now, if you want to see how the USN would mallet a bunch of ships, use a carrier's airwing with P-3/P-8/MQ-4C support for surveillance and maybe the White Cloud constellation for additional ELINT capability.

Thanks for info. I was playing a scenario where air and other assets were not available. Odd to see a multi billion DD vs a rinky dink Patrol Craft that had SSMs and a decent enough SAMs to pose a threat to the Seahawks being able to fight with near parity against the Burke class DD.

Been a while since I've looked into naval combat or played something like CMNO or Harpoon. Seems like frigates in the US Navy are gone or morphed into something far different than the Perry class FFs.

Edited by db_zero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah...there are literally tons of Tomahawks in VLS systems, but they can't theoretically fire at a moving ship.

https://youtu.be/Jgv5ixxgTsQ

I ca BS on the pigeons not surviving. And for those that think that looked like a wimpy impact, there was no warhead.

Re: Frigates

The USN has retired the Perry's in favor of the LCS (recently redesignated as a Frigate). The problem is the LCS is a terrible platform for many reasons. The problem is that we wouldn't consider buying the rights to produce a European frigate here at home. The Danish Iver Huitfeldt class for example being cheaper and far more capable while still being designed along modular lines like LCS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Frigates

The USN has retired the Perry's in favor of the LCS (recently redesignated as a Frigate). The problem is the LCS is a terrible platform for many reasons. The problem is that we wouldn't consider buying the rights to produce a European frigate here at home. The Danish Iver Huitfeldt class for example being cheaper and far more capable while still being designed along modular lines like LCS.

 

Yeah, the LCS from my casual look is probably okay for its original designed mission, but is probably a whole lot less than optimal for the jobs that real frigates are called on to do. I expect the Navy is well aware of this and has been forced to go down this road due to budget constraints.

 

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Won't last beyond the first farmers' protest.

 

Still, at least if anything ever kicks off with Russia the French will have inside scoop on all the ships they've sold them.  But maybe only if they don't have people out there supporting them as they did in Argentina with the Exocets in '82.

Edited by Jock Tamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...