Sea Lanes

[Mohoender]

I'm not thinking of world shipping which is a different matter we already discussed. However, in T2K what sea lane could be available and where will piracy be really active?

Here are might thoughts:
- Bosphorus: open desipite damages by the bomb that missed Istanbul
- Gibraltar: open
- Jutland: open
- Suez Canal: destroyed by nukes
- Panama Canal: I used to have it open with limited access but why should it be so. More likely destroyed.

Major working harbors:
- Macao (China)
- Marseille (France)
- Copenhagen (Denmark)
- Arkhangelsk (Russia)
- Riga (Latvia)
- Several in Norway and Sweden
- Portsmouth and Newcastle (UK)
- Porto (Portugal)
- Istanbul (Turkey)
- Dakar (Senegal)
- Cape Town (South Africa)
- Savannah and Boston (USA)
- Quebec (Quebec)
- Several smaller harbors seeing more shipping these days

Please complete the list, I'm missing several (Thanks Wiki): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_seaports

Major Sea Lane:
Pacific Sealane: going from Europe/US to Falklands and Chile to several Islands in the Pacific. Piracy is extremely important in the Carribean, off the coasts of Portugal/Spain, in the Bay of Biscay and in the Mediterranean. A safer sea lane link the US west coast to various destinations in the Pacific

Mediterranean Sea Lanes Again the most travelled seas, it is also the most dangerous. You better travel in convoy.

Atlantic Sea Lanes Largely abandonned, they are especially unsafe due to mine hazards.

African Sea Lane with the destruction of the Suez Canal, shipping is going trough the cape of good hope, making cape town the most important seaport and benefiting South Africa. Other major stop on the route are Madeira, Cabo Verde, Saint Helena, Reunion/Maurice, Zanzibar. Piracy exist all along the African coasts.

Artic sea lane largely abandonned it linked Arkhangelsk to ports in the Atlantic

Northern Sea Route A major sea route nowadays it is entirely controled by the Soviet Union.

Just some rapid thoughts, feel free to complete.

[Rainbow Six]

Major working harbors:
- Macao (China)
- Marseille (France)
- Copenhagen (Denmark)
- Arkhangelsk (Russia)
- Riga (Latvia)
- Several in Norway and Sweden
- Portsmouth and Newcastle (UK)
- Porto (Portugal)
- Istanbul (Turkey)
- Dakar (Senegal)
- Cape Town (South Africa)
- Savannah and Boston (USA)
- Quebec (Quebec)
- Several smaller harbors seeing more shipping these days

Please complete the list, I'm missing several (Thanks Wiki): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_seaports



There's also Bremerhaven...

There's a few more in the UK and Ireland. Felixstowe (which is the UK's busiest container port according to wiki) and Harwich both survived, as did Plymouth.

The main ports for the Scotland - Northern Ireland ferry service are untouched - Stranraer and Cairnryan in Scotland and Belfast and Larne in Northern Ireland.

There would also be a number of smaller ports...for an extensive listing I'd defer to the list RN7 posted in his thread

IIRC the only nuclear target in the Republic of Ireland was Bantry Bay, so all the other Irish ports should be OK - Dun Laoghaire and Rosslare both had regular ferry services to the UK.

I guess only caveat would be that the absence of a port on a list of nuclear targets does not neccessarily mean that the port is still intact and / or in working order. They could have been plastered by conventional airstrikes or, in the case of those close to ground combat, destroyed by artillery or blown up etc, etc...

[helbent4]

Major working harbors:
- Macao (China)
- Marseille (France)
- Copenhagen (Denmark)
- Arkhangelsk (Russia)
- Riga (Latvia)
- Several in Norway and Sweden
- Portsmouth and Newcastle (UK)
- Porto (Portugal)
- Istanbul (Turkey)
- Dakar (Senegal)
- Cape Town (South Africa)
- Savannah and Boston (USA)
- Quebec (Quebec)
- Several smaller harbors seeing more shipping these days



Mo,

Quebec City gets creamed by a 1 MT airburst to take out the refineries on both sides of the St. Lawrence. This probably flattens the entire city, and to take out all the refineries ground zero would have to be more or less above the river, and the port.

One port that should be added is Churchill, Manitoba. Not only is it a notable (if not major) arctic port on Hudson's Bay, it's also the site of Canada's commercial spaceport. (Currently inactive but possibly reactivated for satellite launch during the Twilight War.)

Tony

[Mohoender]

I couldn't decide for Quebec City as it is also stated that the capital was moved there after some times.

Flaten or not flaten, that is the question.:skull:

[dvyws]

Just off he top of my head...

Don't forget the Singapore Strait - a very busy route, which (a few years ago, anyway) had a reputation for piracy even without the war.

Can't remember if Singapore was a target or not, but even if it was, the Strait should be navigable.

And don't forget Hormuz either - in and out of the Persian Gulf. There is a lot if local trade there, in dhows, as well as the oil. And Dubai is a port and historical pirate area.

If Suez canal is closed, I don't think Aden and the Red Sea will have a great deal of traffic, but there are ports at Hodeida in Yemen, Jeddah in Saudi an Port Suez in Egypt, all on the Red Sea.

And there wil probably be a fair bt of trade arounf the West Indies

[Legbreaker]

Don't forget the Singapore Strait - a very busy route, which (a few years ago, anyway) had a reputation for piracy even without the war.
It still does, possibly moreso than around Africa which is getting all the media (and military) attention at the moment.

[helbent4]

I couldn't decide for Quebec City as it is also stated that the capital was moved there after some times.

Flatten or not flatten, that is the question.:skull:

Mo,

It's a puzzle all right. Where would they move the capital to, and why?

The problem with QC is that it's just not a big city, and tends to cluster around the river. The refinery and tank farm is only about 2-3km from the port, and about 5km from the iconic Chateau Frontenac and the National Assembly/parliament buildings in the old city.

Probably it's the name that's most important. Even if the old city and the parliament buildings are gone, as long as they move the Québec National Assembly to somewhere within the city limits it counts symbolically. If needed, the airport is on the outskirts of the city upriver to the west, a relatively good spot and far away from advancing Canadian troops. As well or in conjunction, the strike on the refineries could have been off target and hit somewhere to the south, leaving most or part of the city/capital buildings/port intact.

Getting back to the topic, I don't see the Northwest Passage as being a feasible route, unfortunately. Due to mysterious processes that are still hotly disputed by some in the USA (possibly involving the heating of a globe-like celestial body that may or may not be Earth by some unknown and disputed mechanism by a species that allegedly evolved from ape-like organisms) the ice has been rapidly retreating and the Northwest Passage will soon be navigatable by commercial traffic many months of the year. Given the conditions outlined in "Howling Wilderness", I see the ice shelf advancing as temperatures cool and moisture is locked up in the polar regions. Hudson's Bay and Churchill will still be accessible.

On the west coast, the Port of Vancouver would be largely intact. In the BYB Canada target list only the refineries/oil storage facilities around Burrard Inlet get hit. These areas are either to the east of the Port of Vancouver facilities, the Robert's Bank Superport (a twin container port and coal terminal facility) to the south or the various facilities on the Fraser River like the Fraser Surrey Docks. The city is largely abandoned and in the Legion MccRae adventure "The River" the container port downtown also takes a direct hit, but that leaves several large port areas intact (if inoperative).

Further, aside from the Singapore Strait the Strait of Malacca is the largest and busiest in the world. Piracy is a serious problem there but would probably decline with the collapse of world trade.

Tony

[Fusilier]

Due to mysterious processes that are still hotly disputed by some in the USA (possibly involving the heating of a globe-like celestial body that may or may not be Earth by some unknown and disputed mechanism by a species that allegedly evolved from ape-like organisms) the ice has been rapidly retreating and the Northwest Passage will soon be navigatable by commercial traffic many months of the year.

I wasn't sure I should laugh or rage.

[dragoon500ly]

Due to mysterious processes that are still hotly disputed by some in the USA (possibly involving the heating of a globe-like celestial body that may or may not be Earth by some unknown and disputed mechanism by a species that allegedly evolved from ape-like organisms)


Hmmmm, I do believe that he called we'ins apes!!!! It's a good thing that I'm descended from the lone survivor of Roswell, otherwise I'd have to nuke the site from orbit....just to be sure!

;)

[helbent4]

Hmmmm, I do believe that he called we'ins apes!!!! It's a good thing that I'm descended from the lone survivor of Roswell, otherwise I'd have to nuke the site from orbit....just to be sure!

;)

Lee,

I, of course, speak only for myself!

Hey, what the hell are you doing here, anyways? Did you hear there was some colonists' daughters down here that needed rescuing from their virginity?

Tony

[dragoon500ly]

Lee,

I, of course, speak only for myself!

Hey, what the hell are you doing here, anyways? Did you hear there was some colonists' daughters down here that needed rescuing from their virginity?

Tony

But of course!!! After all, cavalrymen are know for their abilities in fornification, drunkness and above all else, the humbling of the lowly infantry!!

:D

[dragoon500ly]

Can't remember if Singapore was a target or not, but even if it was, the Strait should be navigable.

Just a cruel thought, but wouldn't the Soviets find it easy to mine the Singapore Strait as well as the passages through the Malay Barrier? A very sizable percentage of the world's shipping goes through both...

[helbent4]

Just a cruel thought, but wouldn't the Soviets find it easy to mine the Singapore Strait as well as the passages through the Malay Barrier? A very sizable percentage of the world's shipping goes through both...

Lee,

That's a great point. At least some of these areas would be mined by some power or another. Soviet subs or surface raiders may be able to lay minefields, even using nuclear mined. Or local combatants might want to isolate the area from trade for some reason. These minefields may be cleared or partially cleared over time.

Tony

[Legbreaker]

Unlike the Panama and Suez canals, the Bosphorus, etc, there's more than one path to take between the hundreds, even thousands of islands. Mining them all is probably beyond even the strongest of superpowers.
It's these many islands, inlets, etc that make it such a rich area for pirates - they can raid a ship and simply disappear before a response arrives.
I'm sure the attempt would be made, and there's bound to be a few stray mines floating about to make the area even more dangerous to shipping, but it's unlikely any concerted effort would be made. You don't have to travel more than a few hundred miles more to avoid the worst choke points, and adding a day or three to the journey may avoid the area almost entirely.

[Canadian Army]

Quebec City, Quebec would not be operating due to fact, all access to Quebec City can only be archived by way of the Gulf of St. Lawrence, which would have mined sometime after the start of the twilight war. However St. John's Harbour, Newfoundland and Labrador and Sydney, Nova Scotia would be functioning. I see both the harbours at busy places, due to three offshore oil fields around Newfoundland and Labrador and Steel Mill and Coal Mine in Nova Scotia.

[Legbreaker]

Mines can be swept clear. With the Soviet navy at the bottom of the ocean, and most of it designed in the first place for defence close to home, I don't see mines playing a big part in the war away from the hotspots.

[dragoon500ly]

Unlike the Panama and Suez canals, the Bosphorus, etc, there's more than one path to take between the hundreds, even thousands of islands. Mining them all is probably beyond even the strongest of superpowers.
It's these many islands, inlets, etc that make it such a rich area for pirates - they can raid a ship and simply disappear before a response arrives.
I'm sure the attempt would be made, and there's bound to be a few stray mines floating about to make the area even more dangerous to shipping, but it's unlikely any concerted effort would be made. You don't have to travel more than a few hundred miles more to avoid the worst choke points, and adding a day or three to the journey may avoid the area almost entirely.

I'm still researching this one...

But a former USN sub driver I work with claims that many of the gaps in the Malay Barrier are too shallow for ocean-going shipping. He also tells me that one of the fears of the USN was India deciding to make a power play and blocking the major passages.

[dragoon500ly]

Mines can be swept clear. With the Soviet navy at the bottom of the ocean, and most of it designed in the first place for defence close to home, I don't see mines playing a big part in the war away from the hotspots.

Don't know about most of the Soviet Navy being designed for home defense; My 1993 copy of the Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets of the World has this to say...

1 Sierra II SSN, able to carry up to 36 mines
2 Sierra I SSN, ditto
26 Victor III SSN, ditto
7 Victor II SSN, ditto
15 Victor I SSN, ditto
20 Kilo SS, able to carry up to 24 mines
18 Tango SS, ditto
40 Foxtrot SS, able to carry up to 44 mines
4 Kynda CG, able to carry up to 80 mines
7 Sverdlov CL, able to carry up to 200 mines
11 Udaloy DDG, able to carry up to 50 mines
14 Sovremennyy DDG, able to carry up to 80 mines
6 Kashin DDG, able to carry up to 40 mines
32 Krivak I/II FFG, able to carry up to 20 mines
3 Alesha ML, able to carry up to 300 mines
75 Natya/Yurka class MS, able to carry up to 20 mines

I tried to keep the list to just ship types known to have served with the Soviet Indian Ocean Squadron; now this squadron numbers from 3 to as many as 20 ships, depending upon the local situation...still.

[Legbreaker]

Ok, perhaps not designed, but intended.
We also know in the books that Soviet naval power, hell, all naval power of note, was on the bottom very early on (before the nukes I believe). There may well not have been time to lay minefields of any size in far off places.
You can be sure though that surface ships would have a very hard time even attempting to mine a foreign port or shipping channel.

However, even just one mine, or the rumour of mines can create delays and fear in ship crews.

[helbent4]

Quebec City, Quebec would not be operating due to fact, all access to Quebec City can only be archived by way of the Gulf of St. Lawrence, which would have mined sometime after the start of the twilight war. However St. John's Harbour, Newfoundland and Labrador and Sydney, Nova Scotia would be functioning. I see both the harbours at busy places, due to three offshore oil fields around Newfoundland and Labrador and Steel Mill and Coal Mine in Nova Scotia.

CA,

It's not only the Soviets that would seek to mine the St. Lawrence seaway (probably using sub-laid "bottom" mines which are hard to detect and sweep). Those mines could and if at all possible be cleared at some point and it would be difficult for the Soviets to repeat this operation. They might well lay a nuclear mine, however, to decide the issue once and for all! (Nuclear mines were developed but apparently never deployed, at least in our timeline.)

Once the French decide to intervene in Quebec, whatever minelaying capability remained would be deployed to close the St. Lawrence again and any other Quebec ports. Even with regular minesweeping by the French it's hard to see how any aid could regularly reach the separatists, and indeed in AD2300 Quebec is no longer a separate nation. (In fact, it makes a kind of realpolitik sense that the French would actually want to broker a settlement to create a stable state in Canada (in counterpoint to a politically chaotic and hostile USA) rather than support an untenable independent Quebec state).

As for Leg's point about other sea lane choke points and the possibility of bypassing dangerous areas, the ocean is indeed a large place and some dangerous areas can be avoided by taking alternate routes. Traffic passes through choke points like the Straights of Malacca primarily due to economics: it's simply the most efficient route and it would cost too much to go around. Also, these areas are thoroughly mapped with respects to tides and hazards, and are therefore safe and easy to navigate. More than one nation and faction would have reason to close off sea lanes in strategic areas, likewise others would seek to keep them open. It's debatable which would prevail in what area but probably all sea lanes and especially maritime choke points are still significantly more dangerous during and after the Twilight War.

In the aftermath of the Twilight War, I think established sea lanes (even those that are hazardous) would be used for two reasons: fuel is so expensive that ships will still have to take the most efficient route, and without electronic navigational aids (like GPS, LORAN-C/CHAYKA, etc.) navigation is going to become much more difficult. Navigation won't be impossible in most places, but in close waters like off Malaysia/Singapore treading off the beaten path is asking for trouble that ships can't afford.

Tony

[Mohoender]

We also know in the books that Soviet naval power, hell, all naval power of note, was on the bottom very early on (before the nukes I believe). There may well not have been time to lay minefields of any size in far off places.


In fact, what we know is that surface ships get to the bottom of the sea. Little is said on the subs. What we can guess is that little survive the exchange but also that they are active at launching the nukes.

For my part, I consider mines to be a real threat in T2K but a random one. You won't find large minefields as in ww2 but NATO's capability to clear the existing ones is equally reduced to nothing.

Another thing, Soviets used to drop mines from aircrafts and Tu-95 Bear will flight much longer than B-2 Spirit. In addition, Antonovs can also be easily modified to drop mines.

[helbent4]

In fact, what we know is that surface ships get to the bottom of the sea. Little is said on the subs. What we can guess is that little survive the exchange but also that they are active at launching the nukes.

For my part, I consider mines to be a real threat in T2K but a random one. You won't find large minefields as in ww2 but NATO's capability to clear the existing ones is equally reduced to nothing.

Another thing, Soviets used to drop mines from aircrafts and Tu-95 Bear will flight much longer than B-2 Spirit. In addition, Antonovs can also be easily modified to drop mines.

Mo,

Naval mines can be laid by pretty much any ship, including converted cargo vessels. You might still find large minefields of "moored" mines protecting installations or strategic inshore waters like ports, naval bases, river mouths, etc. Drifting mines are in theory banned but could still be used as "terror" weapons (not effective but still feared due to unpredictability) or as a consequence of becoming unmoored.

I think the most common minefield would be made from "bottom mines" laid by aircraft and subs:

Bottom mines

Bottom mines are used when the water is no more than 60 meters (180 ft) deep or when mining for submarines down to around 200 meters (660 ft). They are much harder to detect and sweep, and can carry a much larger warhead than a moored mine. Bottom mines commonly use pressure sensitive exploders, which are less sensitive to sweeping.

These mines usually weigh between 150 and 1,500 kilograms (330 to 3,300 pounds), including between 125 and 1,400 kg (275 to 3,090 pounds) of explosives.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_mine

These weapons explode under a target and the resulting cavity (the "bubble jet effect") rupturing the target's hull or even breaking it apart.

Tony

[Legbreaker]

Little is said on the subs.

The Last Submarine mentions that all but two (I think) US subs were left near the end of 1997. One went down shortly after (before Christmas) and the other is the sub the module deals with.

I doubt that the Soviet, or the rest of the NATO fleets would have fared any better.

Note that this is within the first 12 months of the war.

[Canadian Army]

CA,

It's not only the Soviets that would seek to mine the St. Lawrence seaway (probably using sub-laid "bottom" mines which are hard to detect and sweep). Those mines could and if at all possible be cleared at some point and it would be difficult for the Soviets to repeat this operation. They might well lay a nuclear mine, however, to decide the issue once and for all! (Nuclear mines were developed but apparently never deployed, at least in our timeline.)

Once the French decide to intervene in Quebec, whatever minelaying capability remained would be deployed to close the St. Lawrence again and any other Quebec ports. Even with regular minesweeping by the French it's hard to see how any aid could regularly reach the separatists, and indeed in AD2300 Quebec is no longer a separate nation. (In fact, it makes a kind of realpolitik sense that the French would actually want to broker a settlement to create a stable state in Canada (in counterpoint to a politically chaotic and hostile USA) rather than support an untenable independent Quebec state).

As for Leg's point about other sea lane choke points and the possibility of bypassing dangerous areas, the ocean is indeed a large place and some dangerous areas can be avoided by taking alternate routes. Traffic passes through choke points like the Straights of Malacca primarily due to economics: it's simply the most efficient route and it would cost too much to go around. Also, these areas are thoroughly mapped with respects to tides and hazards, and are therefore safe and easy to navigate. More than one nation and faction would have reason to close off sea lanes in strategic areas, likewise others would seek to keep them open. It's debatable which would prevail in what area but probably all sea lanes and especially maritime choke points are still significantly more dangerous during and after the Twilight War.

In the aftermath of the Twilight War, I think established sea lanes (even those that are hazardous) would be used for two reasons: fuel is so expensive that ships will still have to take the most efficient route, and without electronic navigational aids (like GPS, LORAN-C/CHAYKA, etc.) navigation is going to become much more difficult. Navigation won't be impossible in most places, but in close waters like off Malaysia/Singapore treading off the beaten path is asking for trouble that ships can't afford.

Tony

I did not mean the soviets laying mines, I meant Maritime Command, aka the Royal Canadian Navy. They would do this as precaution to prevent soviet subs from penetrating the St. Lawrence seaway, just like in the Battle of the St. Lawrence. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_St._Lawrence

[dragoon500ly]

In fact, what we know is that surface ships get to the bottom of the sea. Little is said on the subs. What we can guess is that little survive the exchange but also that they are active at launching the nukes.

For my part, I consider mines to be a real threat in T2K but a random one. You won't find large minefields as in ww2 but NATO's capability to clear the existing ones is equally reduced to nothing.

Another thing, Soviets used to drop mines from aircrafts and Tu-95 Bear will flight much longer than B-2 Spirit. In addition, Antonovs can also be easily modified to drop mines.

The Soviets were always considered to have the largest mine inventories of any of the major naval powers; according to Norman Polmar's "Guide to the Soviet Navy" they had between 350,000 and 400,000 naval mines (of 48 different types) stockpiled. While a portion dates back to World War II, a large number are modern mines capable of being planted in depths of up to 3,000 feet (915m). Polmar goes on to make the claim that this is several times the size of the US/NATO mine inventory.

Soviet naval writings stress both a defensive and a offensive use of mines; defensive to protect critical Soviet naval ports as well as provide secure locations for the SSBN force to shelter in. The offensive use is to blockade NATO ports, and critical chokepoints in the sea lanes....the Greenland-Iceland-UK gaps for certain, but based on some of the writings, I can see Gib, the Dardenalles, Suez, Hormouz and even the Malay barrier.

There is an old naval saying that goes "any ship can be a minesweeper, once." The belts don't have to be heavy, but scattering 30-40 mines in a area and programming them to go active after a period of time....

[helbent4]

I did not mean the soviets laying mines, I meant Maritime Command, aka the Royal Canadian Navy. They would do this as precaution to prevent soviet subs from penetrating the St. Lawrence seaway, just like in the Battle of the St. Lawrence.

CA,

Thanks for clarifying, I was thinking along those lines as well.

Tony

[Mohoender]

The Last Submarine mentions that all but two (I think) US subs were left near the end of 1997. One went down shortly after (before Christmas) and the other is the sub the module deals with.



Right, I had forgot about that one.:)

[Rainbow Six]

Little is said on the subs.

Going from memory I think there was a Challenge article about the Baltic Coast of Poland which described what was left of the Polish Navy. I seem to recall it pretty much consisted of a handful of patrol boats, but there was mention of a submarine, although I can't recall if it was operational.

I'll try and hunt for the article later...it was one of the first Challenges to come out after T2K was launched.

[helbent4]

Going from memory I think there was a Challenge article about the Baltic Coast of Poland which described what was left of the Polish Navy. I seem to recall it pretty much consisted of a handful of patrol boats, but there was mention of a submarine, although I can't recall if it was operational.

I'll try and hunt for the article later...it was one of the first Challenges to come out after T2K was launched.

Dave,

The article "The Baltic Coast: A Looter's Guide" is in Challenge #25, the first after T2K's launch. It's available on DrivethruRPG.com

That said, there is a surviving Whisky-class diesel-electric coastal defence submarine, a T-42 class minesweeper and some Osa patrol boats. Any of these could lay mines.

With a full load of fuel the Whiskey could manage 25,000km on the surface and 11,000 submerged.

Tony

[Rainbow Six]

Dave,

The article "The Baltic Coast: A Looter's Guide" is in Challenge #25, the first after T2K's launch. It's available on DrivethruRPG.com

Thanks Tony, I thought it was that one but wasn't certain.

Cheers

Dave

[pmulcahy11b]

Don't forget, both sides had nuclear mines in their inventory. You could run into one of those floating around...

[helbent4]

Don't forget, both sides had nuclear mines in their inventory. You could run into one of those floating around...

Paul,

I've seen references they were developed some time in the fifties but never put into production. (I could see nuclear naval mines being a part of the early Cold War rush to develop nukes of all types but regarded as a little too uncontrollable and unnecessary like the plethora of nukes from the Mk45 torpedo to the Davey Crockett to nuclear-tipped SAMs and air-to-air rockets, all of which are now out of service.)

The drawback of a nuclear mine is there is no way to exercise positive control of the weapon. That is, a vessel would arm and deploy it, then leave and hope someone sets it off, but doesn't know when or perhaps even if. Plus, the target is likely random unless (say) there is advance notice a high value target will pass by, yet nothing else will set the mine off in the mean time. The delay is something of an advantage for submarines, who would at least have the opportunity to relocate to a safe distance, which was a serious problem with the Mk 45 torpedo.

Still, such mines could have finally been manufactured in the run up to the war and after the start.

Tony

[Legbreaker]

I think it's worth noting that all four of Poland's Whiskey class boats were retired by 1986.
From wiki:
Poland (four vessels, 1962-1986, retired)
While it's possible one or more of these could have been reactivated/not retired, it seems rather unlikely they'd be all that serviceable - they were already about 25 years old when retired. IRL the last boat was decommissioned in 1988.
Haven't been able to find out what happened to the hulls in the few minutes I've got available right now (scrapped and broken up, dry docked, museum, park ornament, etc).

[Mohoender]

Haven't been able to find out what happened to the hulls in the few minutes I've got available right now (scrapped and broken up, dry docked, museum, park ornament, etc).

I would think scrapped as they were replaced by 2 Foxtrot and 1 Kilo. At most, the one decomissioned in 1988 could have survived with the other providing spares.

Also to note, 50 Whiskey remained on soviet navy list in 1990 with 22 in the Baltic, 14 in the Black Sea, 10 in the Pacific and 4 in the North Fleet. By 1991 only 11 remained. I wander if these would have been recommissioned for secondary missions. Whiskey could carry 22mines in place of the torpedoes.

[helbent4]

Also to note, 50 Whiskey remained on soviet navy list in 1990 with 22 in the Baltic, 14 in the Black Sea, 10 in the Pacific and 4 in the North Fleet. By 1991 only 11 remained. I wander if these would have been recommissioned for secondary missions. Whiskey could carry 22mines in place of the torpedoes.

Mo,

This Whiskey class submarine also might not be one of the original ones. If the Soviets still had 50 of them in inventory, certainly one or more could have been transferred to the Polish navy as part of some new sub-building programme in the 90's.

Tony

[Mohoender]

Mo,

This Whiskey class submarine also might not be one of the original ones. If the Soviets still had 50 of them in inventory, certainly one or more could have been transferred to the Polish navy as part of some new sub-building programme in the 90's.

Tony

Indeed, it is possible. However, I would tend to think that they would sell them Kilo-class submarine instead. IRL they were exported to Algeria (4), China (12), India (10), Iran (3), Poland (1) and Romania (1). In T2K none will be exported to China or Iran and export to India might be reduced by 4 units.

Most of the remaining Whiskey were training stations while many others had been modified to some extend.

[helbent4]

Indeed, it is possible. However, I would tend to think that they would sell them Kilo-class submarine instead. IRL they were exported to Algeria (4), China (12), India (10), Iran (3), Poland (1) and Romania (1). In T2K none will be exported to China or Iran and export to India might be reduced by 4 units.

Most of the remaining Whiskey were training stations while many others had been modified to some extend.

Mo,

After an exhausting three minutes of research, I am unable to determine what happened to the Whiskey subs in Russia. For the sake of argument I'll agree with you, but that doesn't invalidate my point. For example, even if the Soviets sold Poland the superior Kilo class sub the Poles could have still kept one of their Whiskeys for training purposes (or simply been given another one by the Soviets). By 2000 all other operational subs are gone, and all that remains is a single Whiskey sub formerly used for training.

Tony

[Mohoender]

Mo,

After an exhausting three minutes of research, I am unable to determine what happened to the Whiskey subs in Russia. For the sake of argument I'll agree with you, but that doesn't invalidate my point. For example, even if the Soviets sold Poland the superior Kilo class sub the Poles could have still kept one of their Whiskeys for training purposes (or simply been given another one by the Soviets). By 2000 all other operational subs are gone, and all that remains is a single Whiskey sub formerly used for training.

Tony

Absolutely true. I actually didn't think about invalidating it.:) Here is something to help you out for another three minutes;):

http://russian-ships.info/eng/warships/

[dragoon500ly]

Don't forget, both sides had nuclear mines in their inventory. You could run into one of those floating around...

My navy buddy told me about this one....

THE nightmare scenario for the navy during the 1970s-80s was a first strike by the Soviets, using freighters. Yup, everyday, freighters sailing into American ports to onload American grain, offload ore....real dull commercial stuff, right?

The area of concern was that one of these freighters could carry a couple of good-sized nuclear bombs...right into the heart of Seattle, New York, New Orleans, Baltimore....get the picture?

I'm told what really had them worried was one in New York harbor...and the President taking a trip to NYC to visit the UN...and the lighting off of a 25MT...zero warning, wide spread confusion in the chain of command, a second strike from sub-launched missiles within the next ten minutes...

An intresting idea...

[helbent4]

Absolutely true. I actually didn't think about invalidating it.:) Here is something to help you out for another three minutes;):

http://russian-ships.info/eng/warships/

Mo,

Wow, thanks! That's a pretty comprehensive list.

I mean, hey, we all understand the Whiskey is listed in the "Baltic Coast" because the authors had no idea what was going to happen in the future and could only work on the information they had. But it's fun to rationalise the sometimes more far-fetched elements of canon.

Tony

[Legbreaker]

Absolutely agree. It's possible that the Whiskey in question was Soviet in origin, but beached and abandoned by it's crew because of battle damage. The enterprising Poles then salvaged it and have slowly carried out repair as resource came available.
But, with only 230 Naval personnel in Gdynia, and most of the vessels little more than rusting hulks, it's bound to be VERY slow going on repairs (also likely to be well down the list or priorities).

[rcaf_777]

However St. John's Harbour, Newfoundland and Labrador and Sydney, Nova Scotia would be functioning. I see both the harbours at busy places, due to three offshore oil fields around Newfoundland and Labrador and Steel Mill and Coal Mine in Nova Scotia.

Sydney would be the fall back harbour for the Canadian Navy, there is a good harbour with alots of natural protection and the Navy already had a maintiance/drydock there used by the Fleet here are some pics I took of the harbour that I took when I was there for my honeymoon, would got some more pics but how do you explain to your wife you want to take more pics of the harbour for TW 2000 adventure that planing

[Mohoender]

Sydney would be the fall back harbour for the Canadian Navy, there is a good harbour with alots of natural protection and the Navy already had a maintiance/drydock there used by the Fleet here are some pics I took of the harbour that I took when I was there for my honeymoon, would got some more pics but how do you explain to your wife you want to take more pics of the harbour for TW 2000 adventure that planing

Don't know. However, you can explain her that you want to get back there because you had so great memories about that honeymoon.;) So romantic to go on a second honeymoon.:D:cool:

[Legbreaker]

Interesting. Not sure the old WWII defences would be of any use in a T2K scenario though. More likely they'd be bulldozed and rebuilt to cater for modern weapons.
Provided of course they're not under some heritage order or other....

[boogiedowndonovan]

Major working harbors:
- Macao (China)
.

just a minor quibble, Macau was still a Portugese possession until 1999. In the T2k timeline the handover would likely never happen (like T2k Hong Kong).

Also interesting to note, Portugual withdrew military troops from Macau in 1974. Portugual may have deployed troops after fighting breaks out along the PRC-Soviet border in 1995. Not sure if Macau had any territorial or reserve military like the Royal Hong Kong Regiment, but I could see them forming some type of reserve type force of Macau part time soldiers.

Maybe this should be in another thread but my assumption is that, in addition to deploying ground troops, the Portugese also deploy air and naval assets to protect the territory as well as sea and air traffic to and from Macau.

[Rainbow Six]

Also interesting to note, Portugual withdrew military troops from Macau in 1974. Portugual may have deployed troops after fighting breaks out along the PRC-Soviet border in 1995. Not sure if Macau had any territorial or reserve military like the Royal Hong Kong Regiment, but I could see them forming some type of reserve type force of Macau part time soldiers.

Maybe this should be in another thread but my assumption is that, in addition to deploying ground troops, the Portugese also deploy air and naval assets to protect the territory as well as sea and air traffic to and from Macau.

The idea of Portugal deploying troops in 1995 sounds feasable enough to me.

Potential snag with any deployment of air forces might be that IRL Macau didn't have an airport of its own until the end of 1995, so after the outbreak of the Sino Soviet War. It's debatable what impact (if any) the War might have on the completion of the airport - Macau is neutral territory, so in one respect there may be no affect, but if anything brought in from the PRC (building materials, labour force, etc) might be disrupted enough to delay completion at best or cause work to be halted completely at worst.

If it wasn't finished I don't think there would be a a suitable facility in Macau to host any military aircraft (Hong Kong would be the nearest option).