Canon module omissions - RDF module
 

Wanted to start a discussion on various omissions and see if we can come up with what good suggestions would be for filling the holes -

just to be clear I am not talking about corrections or changes to data that is in the modules

I am referring to stuff that was referred to and then left out

For instance

In the RDF module there are the following omissions that are mentioned but then never detailed

1) The USN fleet is said to contain mulitple civilian ships for supporting forces in Iran and Saudi Arabia as well as small patrol craft but they are never detailed as to how many and what they might be

2) A French task force built around the Jean Bart (which I think they meant to say the Joan de Arc) is said to be in the area but never detailed as to composition

3) SOCCENT is not detailed at all - there are ranger and special forces battalions, SEAL TEAMS, etc.. but no idea on how big they are, how many they are, etc..

there are also Special Air and naval forces assigned as well but again they are left out and not detailed

There may be more but thats a nice starting list

So what do people think should have been in the module to flesh out these areas but wasnt there because they were overlooked?

Love to see what kind of ideas people come up with

And again - these would be suggestions for people to use who may play the RDF module

for instance in Kings Ransom there is this detail that gives some detail of what may be missing as to SOCCENT

US TEAM BRAVO-99/5TH SPECIAL FORCES GROUP

Team Bravo-99 is the controlling headquarters for the six
Special Forces A-Teams that operate in the area.

Referee's Note: The A-teams that comprise B-99 are deeply
committed to the people of Iran. In many cases, it is nearly impossible
to distinguish them from the locals. The Green Berets
like it that way.

Leaders: Major Tony Garth is the CO of Bravo-99. Captain
Harry Mikulis is the Operations and Intelligence Officer.
Where Found: B-99 is located in Lordegan. Its component ATeams
can be found throughout the area.

Numbers: The current strength of Bravo-99 is 50 men. Each
A-Team averages six Green Berets each.

Weapons: A mixture of small arms of the world, NATO and
Warsaw Pact weapons predominating.

IIRC, SOCCENT didn't exist at the time GDW wrote that module. An omission from our viewpoint, but not at the time.

I prefer to focus on what's in the books, not what's been left out. The gaps leave room for extrapolation in whichever why we like - within reason and as long as it's believable.

I see your point Legbreaker - and not trying to be nitpicky but instead see what people think may be there more as a way of exploring people's ideas in the forum on what should fill those holes.

For instance there are no support ships for the USN - but no task force goes anywhere without at least one oiler and one repair ship for doing repairs.

And the small patrol boats could be used by someone for an adventure - so like to get a flavor for what people think those could be.

You might want to do a search on Matt Wiser's posts. Outside of the DC group he is probably the best OOB guy (IMHO).

He did some work on an RDF air orbat, and may have done something for the French Navy.

-bdd

thanks donovan for the information- or should I call you boogie?

That USN support ship might be sitting at the bottom of the Gulf or the Indian Ocean.

The Royal Navy maintains at least one warship and one Royal Fleet Auxiliary vessel in the Persian Gulf. That might have been reinforced during 1996 on the T2K timeline.

Whether they’re still afloat or not by the end of 2000 is quite another matter.

There's also been some debate about whether there would be a Royal Air Force presence or not. Personally I'm inclined to think that if there is it would be minimal - perhaps a Squadron each of Jaguars and strike Tornados and a flight of Hercules. They'd probably rely on the Americans for air defence - RAF air defence interceptors would be in short supply and needed for home defence.

While we're discussing the region, I'm guessing Diego Garcia got a good pasting, right? I don't have the RDF sourcebook handy.

I haven't a clue if Diego Garcia is mentioned anywhere to be honest...

I can't imagine it wasn't hit - it is an enormous asset and for it to be left sitting there is unimaginable. It's a landing site for intercontinental bombers, a staging point for navy sorties, special forces, the entire RDF...yeah, I'm thinking on Thanksgiving day DG probably got a good smacking around.

Agreed...and given the size of it it really wouldn't take a lot of warheads to take it out of commission.

SOCCENT
 

My copy is in storage, but I seem to recall that the V.2 US Vehicle Guide lists manpower for the 75th Infantry Regiment (Ranger). I personally question the entire regiment deploying to CENTCOM, but maybe that's just me.

The SEALS may have been attached to the Amphibious Corps for administrative purposes by 2000.

I'm sure part of the 160th SOAR deployed to CENTCOM, but by 2000 they may have been absorbed into the 101st Air Assault Division.

An obvious answer may be the creation of extra Bns in Europe (and North America as it is invaded).

75th Ranger
 

In the context of a general mobilization, I don't disagree. In fact, I find it quite likely.

But the RDF Sourcebook makes it sound like the entire pre-war regiment deployed to CENTCOM with all three battalions. That just strikes me as odd since the US entered the war in Europe before CENTCOM was able to deploy in any strength. You'd think at least a battalion would be handy as a raid force for 7th Army early on.

The support ships have to be there - otherwise those ships wouldnt be operational - and clearly the carrier task force is operational

most likely they were left out by Frank, just like he left out the civilian ships and small patrol boats

alternatively - and as I am in the process of doing - they may be in Kenya so they would be out of range of any Soviet attack - in his notes he had several support ships for the forces there - and I am using that as a guide

he also listed several different Special Forces units who are there as part of what was deployed to CENTCOM originally but then sent to Kenya

may post some of that here to give a flavor of what may be there based on his Kenya notes

Didn't do anything on the French Navy, so if someone there knows 'em better than I do, have at it!

I'd have one of the Sacramento-class AOEs in the PG: they'd be handy, and would also run down to Kenya on supply runs and would be able to take care of themselves, given the lack of serious threats by 2000.

I wonder if Darwin and other northern Australian bases and airfields might have been viable dispersal points/emergency points of relocation for some of those assets?

It could be that the 4th Bn remained at Benning School for Boys to train a whole new battalion, in addition to individual replacements.

I put it down to transport difficulties, after all the logical units to deploy to Europe are heavy units (see notes about difficulties in deploying even light units to the Middle East).

In Europe maybe a Bn was formed from volunteers of units already there? Might be an article in that...

From memory, it's been discussed before a while back. I think the consensus was it was stripped of supplies fairly early on, and then pasted by the Soviets in late 1997.
Not at all. There's plenty of ports in the area the ships can dock at and take on fuel, food, ammo, etc. It's not like they're operating over huge distances far away from their fuel supplies.
Also, just because the ships are there, do they really have to be at sea? Doesn't it make more sense given the limited irreplaceable ammunition and crews, for them to only put to sea when actually needed?

A Proposed French Fleet
 

OK, a stab at the French Naval Forces in the region:

Jeanne D’Arc (R97) – helicopter cruiser
Armament
• 1 x MM38 Exocet Anti Ship Missile Launcher
• 4 x 100mm guns
Helicopters: 8 x Super Frelon

Georges Leygues (D640) – Anti Submarine Frigate
Armament
• 1 x Crotale EDIR Anti Air Missile Launcher
• 2 x Simbad Anti Air Missile Launchers
• 1 x 100mm gun
• 2 x 20mm guns
• 1 x MM38 Exocet Anti Ship Missile Launcher
• 2 x Torpedo Tubes
Helicopters: 2 x Westland Lynx

Provides specialised anti sub capability with back up anti air role (according to wiki, Georges Leygues usualy accompanied Jeanne D'Arc on ops)

La Fayette (F710) – Frigate
Armament
• 1 x MM40 Exocet Anti Ship Missile Launcher
• 1 x 100mm gun
• 2 x 20mm guns
• 1 x Crotale CN2 Anti Air Missile Launcher
Helicopter: 1 x Eurocopter Panther

Stealth Frigate, commissioned 1996 - gives additional anti air capability

Jean Bart (D615) – Anti Air Frigate
Armament
• 1 x SM-1MR Anti Air Missile Launcher
• 2 x Mistral CIWS Anti Air Missile Launchers
• 2 x L5 Torpedo Tubes
• 1 x MM40 Exocet Anti Ship Missile Launcher
• 1 x 100mm gun
• 2 x 20mm anti aircraft guns
Helicopter: 1 x Eurocopter Panther

Specialised anti air capability (and the only ship we know is there)

Orage (L9022) – Landing Platform Dock
Armament
• 2 x Simbad Anti Air Missile Launchers
• 2 x 30mm anti aircraft guns
Helicopters: 4 x Super Frelon

Somme (A631) – Replenishment Oiler
Armament
• 1 x 40mm gun
• 1 x Simbad Anti Air Missile Launcher

Améthyste (S605) – Submarine
Armament
• 4 x Torpedo Tubes

So, that gives a helo carrier, an anti sub frigate, an anti air frigate, a "generalised" frigate, a specialised landing platform for amphibious ops, a supply ship, and a sub.

Thoughts?

That is a very balanced and realistic French squadron for the Middle East - and I think the submarine is a good inclusion. Clearly the French should still have. What you have there supports all the missions that they have and definitely has the anti-air assets you would need to survive in one of the few areas where the Soviet air threat is very real and still very capable.

Add in the landing ship and oiler and you have a very capable group that can project power, support both naval and land operations, give their troops good flexiblity as to naval landings and would give anyone planning an air attack on them a very very bloody nose indeed.

Plus considering the size of the French Navy it would show a clear committment to the region while not weakening them in areas like the Med and the English Channel or off the coast of Senegal that they clearly (from canon modules) are making places they want to control.

ammo for this group may not be an issue - the US had large stocks in the area as did the Saudis so they may actually be still very well equipped - I can see, for instance, MilGov sending the Corpus Christi there after she drops off the Soviet scientists back in the US and getting herself a fresh loadout of Harpoons and torpedoes.

How many years of war has there been again?
Didn't the manufacturing facilities around the world get pretty much wiped out in the nuke strikes of 1997 and 1998?
No, there's no way in the universe I can believe there's anything like enough ammo for the ships and units in the area, let alone enough to send elsewhere!

On the subject of the Rangers, I think there are a couple of possibilities for why a battalion doesn’t end up in Europe or Korea. Once the balloon goes up in Germany, there’s a good 6-7 weeks for the US to move forces overseas. This is plenty of time for the Rangers to go in by air if that’s the decision. They don’t, though. It seems to me that someone thinks the Rangers will be more useful someplace else.

My first line unit NCO while I was on active duty at the beginning of the 1990’s told me that the real purpose of the Rangers was to seize an airfield so the 82nd could go in. If the Rangers did nothing else, they’ve had paid their way by taking the airfield and relieving the 82nd of the necessity of jumping. He had just come off a 3-year stint as the senior enlisted chemical warfare guy at the regimental HQ. He requested a mech slot at Carson because he was a crispy critter after 3 years and thought he’d like to see his family again. Anyway, such observations about the Rangers have to be taken with a grain of salt, but they provide some interesting insight into how the Rangers might get used at the beginning of WW3.

Once the Germans and the Soviets started fighting, the Soviets probably put pressure on their clients to mobilize and put pressure on the Western Allies. A while ago, I wrote a piece designed to integrate Operation Desert Storm into the v1 chronology. If Iraq assembled new forces to go after Kuwait again, this would put additional pressure on CENTCOM. Of course, we’d have to make some adjustments to events in Iran or at least acknowledge that Iran never softened its attitude towards the US.

By the time might have come to send the Rangers forward, the relative density of the European and Korean battlefields might have called into question the cost-benefit ratio of using a Ranger battalion for raiding in either theater. In the Gulf, on the other hand, lower densities might have made using the Rangers and the 82nd in airmobile operations much more palatable. Also, since the heavy gear going to Europe was consuming the transport that would have been bringing the heavy metal to the Gulf, it may be that CENTCOM was offered the full regiment as a sop.

I'm not familiar with teh timeline to tell for sure, but would it be possible to have a shortage of ships nearby to either use or haul out the hardware ? In such a case it may well have laid there until something able to use it was sent there.

One interesting nugget I came across whilst looking this up was a question mark over whether the T2K French Navy might include a CVN. In our timeline the Charles De Gaulle wasn't commissioned until 2001, but that was five years behind schedule (construction actually started in 1989 and was halted on four separate occasions - reading between the lines it looks like it may have been due to costs) so I think in a V1 timeline where the Cold War continues it's not impossible that the CDG might have been commissioned on time.

Many of the assumptions about the French Navy seem to be based on the idea that there is no Franco-Soviet nuclear exchange of any sort that would account for a number of French vessels. As I have said on many occasions, I find this line of thinking to be out of character for the Soviets. These are not nice guys. If anything, the Anglo-American invasion of East Germany in late 1996 following the apparent Pact success in containing the West German invasion will prove to them that you address your potential enemies while you have the means in hand. Once the nukes start flying, the Soviets are going to hit the French specifically to keep them from making dramatic changes to the balance of power in the post-Exchange world. Imagining otherwise is to give the Soviets either a generosity of character or a naivete that is incompatible with the Soviet regime that fought WW3.

Not at all (at least as far as I'm concerned). I think we all understand from canon that neutral nations are caught up in the 1997 nuclear exchange. However I don't buy into the theory that all the French Naval bases were nuked. As I've stated in the past, the Soviets didn't nuke any of the major UK Naval bases (Portsmouth, Plymouth, Rosyth) during the War and the UK was an active belligerent, so using that precedent I think it's not unreasonable to assume that one or more French bases may also not have been nuked.

Be assured, I have given the idea of a potential Soviet nuclear strike on France a good degree of thought, and am quite certain French targets would have been hit (this is confirmed in the BYB quotes below), however in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, we may have to agree to disagree on the potential target list.

So we know some French Ports were attacked, but not which ones.

The first part of this statement doesn’t really help much, since I believe Marseille is the second largest City in France (in terms of population) after Paris, so all I infer from that is that Paris was attacked in some way. However it is also a port City, so this serves as confirmation that not every port City was nuked. To be fair, Marseille is not a French Naval Base.

Thanks for keeping the emotion low, dude.

I have no problem agreeing to disagree on the target list, given the lack of data. I also don't believe for a moment that the Soviets would have hit every naval base. There's plenty of room for gray between the extremes of an untouched France and a France that has had every naval base nuked.

The fact that UK naval bases weren't hit raises some interesting questions. Did the Soviets want to put a fairly low ceiling on the exchange? This is certainly plausible. Did the Soviets think hitting the baases might not be necessary because losses to the Royal Navy were so great without hitting the bases that there was little to gained by putting another (quid pro quo) nuke on the table? This is also possible. The latter is a question to be answered by someone with a lot more naval savvy than I have, though.

Doubtful. I'm not a navy person, but my understanding is warships don't carry a huge amount of ammunition on board, but rely on fairly regular resupply from support ships (the John Hancock for example only carried about 475-500 rounds for it's 5" gun, and as far as I can see anywhere only the 8 Harpoon missiles loaded in the launchers - can't find much on the other systems).

With the lack of a resupply ship in the area (likely sunk by the Russians I'd think), the limited amount in the various warships is all they can count on for the duration. If there was one, you'd think it important enough to have been included in the OOB.

Of course, all we know about the UK naval bases is that they weren't hit by weapons of 1MT and above. It certainly doesn't preclude them being hit by smaller weapons.

It's not impossible that the UK bases were hit with sub 1mt weapons, but certainly in the case of Portsmouth I think it's unlikely given the fact that it is the new UK Capital and is referred to on multiple occasions in the Survivor's Guide to the United Kingdom.

I’m no naval expert either, but I'm inclined to accept Webstral's theory that the RN had already suffered such heavy losses that the Soviets no longer viewed it as a threat to be be the most plausible explanation - there’s the quote about the last major naval fleet in the World being shattered by June 1997. Either that or they had already suffered heavy enough conventional damage to make nuking them unneccessary.

(Probably noteworthy that that quote specifically says “in the World”. One could use that as an argument in favour of the French Navy also having suffered significant losses, but it would then have to be extended to include all Navies. But we know that even after that point the French retain the capability to move a large force to the Middle East (and also combat troops to Canada, per Challenge #30), and patrol the English Channel and elsewhere - there are other references to the French Navy here and there, chiefly (I think) in the Last Submarine trilogy, e.g. page 48 of Med Cruise, which states “The French have come to view the Western Mediterranean as their own private Sea”.)

The French only have about 9,600 in the middle east (plus ship crews) arriving from the 24th August 1998, and I can only find notes regarding "military advisors" being in Quebec ("Both U.S. governments agreed that France was interfering in a Canadian regional issue and said that France should remove its advisors from Quebec") as of late June 1999 (rumours confirmed by agents sent by Canadian West Military Government of "French combat troops and supplies entering Quebec).

With regard to the middle east troops, there's indications this occurred in stages. In Quebec, the few surviving agents may have only spotted the advisors who'd been there a while and consolidated into one place/unit.

It is therefore plausible the French only had a handful of suitable ships available, and whatever is going on in Quebec could be very low key and consist of just a company or so of troops and their supporting equipment.

Fair point re: Quebec...I don't think there's anything that conclusively proves one way or the other how strong the French presence is - it's even suggested that the French ultimatum to the Canadian government could be a bluff

"The Canadian Federal Government, uncertain of whether or not the French could carry out their threat..."

It would probably also behoove the French to have the Canadians thinking that they (the French) were there in greater numbers than they actually were, something that could be achieved by supplying the Quebec forces with French uniforms and weapons - from a distance Canadian agents wouldn't know whether they were watching French combat troops or Quebec Separatists in French uniform.

This is in relation to the comments made by Leg on ammuntion levels for the US ships in the Persian Gulf - if anyone has torpedoes and Harpoons and other ammo to spare its probably those ships.

The major fighting against the Soviets occurred in the Atlantic and the Pacific, not the IO or the Persian Gulf. Thus if there is anywhere where the USN would have Harpoons and torpedoes and other ammo still in relative abundance it would be the ships in the Persian Gulf and also off of Kenya (as per Frank Frey's notes on his unpublished Kenya module there is another task force there as well)

Obviously those ships werent sent there without some kind of ammo and repair ships - and you dont use Harpoons against land targets. Plus there had to be a CV or CVN in the area for the F-14D's to find their way there - and a CV or CVN means an SSN once was there. So the chance of finding reload torps for her in an ammo ship docked in Mombasa or Saudi Arabia is pretty high.

Now I am not saying she gets a full load out - but a few Harpoons and a half dozen more torpedoes - easily. And I highly doubt canon will be thrown completely out of whack if the Corpus Christi gets re-armed - she is still only one sub.

Do I think that the ships in the PG/IO have Harpoons and torpedoes? Yes, but . . . not necessarily the ones a submarine needs. Surface ships will have a mixture of Mk.46 and Mk.50 torpedoes, not the Mk.48 ADCAP the submarines shoot. The Harpoons and Tomahawks on the surface ships aren't the same model as the ones that can be launched from submarines.

Now if there happens to be a Submarine Tender in the region or if a damaged boat limped into port, then I could see it.

To play Devil's Advocate, that also makes CENTCOM a great place to raid for naval munitions badly needed in theaters where major fighting is occurring.

There's no indication the specific ships in the RDF Sourcebook were always in the gulf. It's entirely possible they are the remnants of shattered fleets from elsewhere, perhaps even the North Sea, gathered there due to the availability of fuel and to help secure that resource.
Yes, it's possible such a ship existed, however the F-14s and other naval aircraft could just as easily have been flown in from other theatres using the last of the available avgas there. Better to send all your planes and pilots to where the fuel is than have them sit unused in Germany or Korea on the off chance of capturing a small supply to allow them an hour or two in the air.

It's possible that if any USN aircraft carriers were lost in the Eastern med their aircraft could have found their way to RAF Akrotiri on Cyprus. From Cyprus it's a reasonably short hop to the Gulf.