************
Matt Wiser
Thanks, Chico! BTW K-141 was the Kursk.
Matt Wiser
************
Matt Wiser
Chico: any Soviet Naval Aviation info going to be added? Don't ask me why, but for some reason they had AF ranks, not naval ones.
Matt Wiser
************
chico20854
This is what I got off of orbat.com last year. I'll bounce it against my other info at home this weekend. I undid the transfer of Frontal Aviation units to naval aviation that was done after the CFE treaty went into effect (the Soviets believed that naval forces were exempt and transferred strike aviation units and Motor Rifle Divisions to the Navy and claimed they were coastal defense). Additional regiments would be stood up to operate aircraft on the new carriers too.
VMF, HQ Moscow
Direct reporting:
33rd Center for Combat Employment and Retraining of Naval Aviation Crews im. E.N. Preobrazhenskiy [33rd TsBP i PLS] (Kulbakino, near Nikolayevym) with:
- 540th IIMRAP (Kulbakino, near Nikolayevym) with 18 Tu-22M and 21 Tu-16
- 555th IIPLVP (Ochakov) with Ka-25 and Ka-27
- 316th OPLAE (Kulbakino, near Nikolayevym) with Be-12
An IIAP was activated in Saki 1989, to test various aircraft for the new "Kuznetsov" carrier.
Northern Fleet (SF):
5th "Kirkenesskaya" Rad Banner MRAD (Olenegorsk, Murmansk oblast)
- 574th MRAP (Katunino [Lakhta], Arkhangelsk area) with 25 Tu-22M
- 924th Guards "Kirkenesskaya" Red Banner MRAP (Olenegorsk, Murmansk oblast) with 32 Tu-22M and 5 Tu-16K-10-26
- 978th MRAP (Severomorsk-3) with 29 Tu-16K-10-26
35th PLAD (Fedotov, Vologodskaya oblast)
- 76th PLAP DD (Fedotov, Vologodskaya oblast) with Tu-142M, Tu-142M3
- 135th PLAP DD (Fedotov, Vologodskaya oblast) with Tu-142M, Tu-142M3
24th OPLAP (Severomorsk-1) with Il-38
392nd ODRAP (Kipelovo, Vologda area) with Tu-95RQ
403rd OPLAP (Severomorsk-2 (Safonovo)) with Be-12
830th OKPLVP (Severomorsk-2 (Safonovo)) with Ka-25/27 (in 4 sqns)
279th OMShAP (Severomorsk-3) with 9 Su-25UTG/UBP and Yak-38 (Carrier Air unit)
? OSAP (?) with transport aircraft
Baltic Fleet (BF):
57th "Smolensk" Red Banner MRAD (Bykhov, Mogilev area, Belorussian SSR)
- 12th MRAP (Ostrov) with Tu-16 [the two regiments at Ostrov had a total of 63 Tu-16]
- 171st Guards MRAP (Bykhov) with 18 Tu-22M, 10 Tu-16
- 240th Guards MRAP (Ostrov) with Tu-16
15th "Tallin" Red Banner Order of Ushakov ODRAP (Chernyakhovsk, Kaliningrad region) with 12 Su-24 and 32 Su-17
49th OPLAE (Kosa, Baltiysk area) with Be-12
145th OPLAE (Riga-Skulte) with Il-38
396th OKPLVP (Donskoye) with Ka-27
745th OKPLVP (Donskoye) with Mi-14, Ka-25
263rd OTAP (Khrabrovo) with transport aircraft
Black Sea Fleet (CHF)
2nd Guards "Sevastopol" MRAD im. N.A. Tokarev (Gvardeyskoye, Crimea)
- 5th Guards "Konstantskiy" MRAP (Veseloye, Crimea) with 22 Tu-22M, 16 Tu-16
- 124th MRAP (Gvardeyskoye, Crimea) with 19 Tu-16
- 943rd MRAP (Oktyabrskoye, Crimea) with 21 Tu-22M, 6 Tu-22R, 6 Tu-16K-10-26
318th OPLAP (Donuzlav, Crimea) with Be-12
917th OSAP (Kacha) with transport aircraft
872nd OPLVP (Kacha) with Mi-14, Mi-8
78th OKPLVP (Donuzlav, Crimea) with Ka-25/27
Pacific Fleet (TOF)
25 MRAD Alekseyevka, Khanka region, Primorskiy Kray
141 MRAP Tu-22M2 Artem
183 MRAP Tu-22M2 Alekseyevka
143 MRAD Sovetskaya Gavan
568 MRAP Tu-16K-10-26* Petrapavlosk
570 MRAP Tu-16K-10-26* Sovetskaya Gavan
* Badger C-mod
73rd OMShAP (Pristanya, Vladivostok area) with Su-17M2/3
304th OMRAP DD (Khorol, Primorskiy Kray) with Tu-94RQ
310th OMRAP DD (Mongokhto, Sovetskaya Gavan' area) with Tu-142/Tu-142M
77th OPLAP (Nikolayevka, south Primorskiy Kray) with Il-38
289th OPLAP (Zolotaya Dolina) with Be-12
317th OSAP (Petropavlovsk-Kamchatka) with Be-12
169th OSAP (Kamrani, Vietnam) with Tu-95RQ and MiG-23MLD (one sqn.)
311th OKShAP (Pristanya, Vladivostok area) with Yak-38
710th OKPLVP (Novonezhino) with Ka-25/27
46th OPLAE (Korsakov) with Mi-14, Mi-8
51st OPLAE (Novonezhino) with Mi-14, Mi-8
593rd OTAP (Nikolayevka) with transport aircraft
abbreviations:
MRAD: Naval Missile-carrying Aviation Division
MRAP: Naval Missile-carrying Aviation Regiment
OKPLVE: Independent Ship-borne Anti-submarine Helicopter Squadron
OKPLVP: Independent Ship-borne Anti-submarine Helicopter Regiment
OKShAP: Independent Ship-borne Shturmovik Aviation Regiment
OMRAP: Independent Naval Missile-carrying Aviation Regiment
OMShAE: Independent Naval Shturmovik Aviation Squadron
OMShAP: Independent Naval Shturmovik Aviation Regiment
OPLAP DD: Independent Long range Anti-submarine Aviation Regiment
OPLAE: Independent Anti-submarine Helicopter Squadron
OPLVP: Independent Anti-submarine Helicopter Regiment
OSAP: Independent Composite Aviation Regiment
OSPLAP: Independent Composite Anti-submarine Aviation Regiment
OTAP: Independent Transport Aviation Regiment
chico20854
************
Matt Wiser
I take it that's a 1989 OB, then. The carrier regiment has Su-33s (navalized Su-27s) and Ka-27 variants nowadays. The MiG-29K was still a likely choice for the fighter/attack role, with the Su-33s being the fleet defense interceptor. The Kiev-class carriers would've had the Yak-41 as a Yak-38 replacement. The Yak-44 was under development for AEW off the big ships.
(It was a E-2 clone)
Matt Wiser
************
thefusilier
I just finished reading the published War Games done by the Naval College which was posted here a couple weeks ago. For you guys doing the naval timeline and events have you read it? I recommend it. While I am not casting doubt on the members here, the War Games had resources to create a timeline of events we don't have... a staff of 600 people from many different agencies, up to date OOBs, politicians playing the role of politicians, Soviets played by intelligence people whose focus is the USSR, information concerning munitions stockpiles, and a battle damage assesment computer.
__________________
The Fusilier
thefusilier
************
antimedic
Can you put that link up?
antimedic
************
chico20854
They're at:
http://www.nwc.navy.mil/press/npapers/np4/np4.pdf about the 1979-83 series and
http://www.nwc.navy.mil/press/npapers/np20/NP20.pdf for the 1984-8 series.
I'm right about to start a long document on NATO maritime strategy and possible Soviet response to it. They rely to a great extent on those 2 documents. The reason for not adopting the wargames wholesale are the later date (allowing Soviet deployment of fixed-wing CVs, for example) and the difference in the situation on the Central front and the China front.
I'm also doing a little more research on Soviet weapons systems, things that the West wasn't aware of such as the Shval 200-knot torpedo. (This relates to the basic issue of how come canon NATO naval losses are so high.)
chico20854
************
Antenna
Naval Forces : Sweden-97
Due to the war only one Gotland class submarine was ready to deliver and had trained staff when the Uppsala Conflict started. Instead of getting rid of one older type Näcken submarine Swedish Armed Forces didn't sell the Näcken system to any one else or scraped it.
1st Submarine Flotilla
1 GOTLAND Class Submarines, 4 VÄSTERGÖTLAND class
2nd Surface Flotilla
20th Missileboat Division, 4 type NORRKÖPING class
21st Missileboat Division, 2 type STOCKHOLM class
23th Small ASW-boat Division, 4 type KAPAREN class
Staff/Supportship HMS Visborg
3rd Surface Flotilla
18th Missileboat Division, 4 type HUGIN class
31st Missileboat Division, 4 type GÖTEBORG class
34th Missileboat Division, 6 type NORRKÖPING class
36th Small ASW-boat Division, 6 type KAPAREN class
Staff/Supportship HMS Trossö
4th MCM Flotilla
41st MCM Division
411st MCM Squadron
412nd MCM Squadron
416th Boyeboat Squadron
Staff/Supportships HMS Utö, HMS Urd
42nd MCM Division
421st MCM Squadron
422nd MCM Squadron
426th Boyeboat Squadron
Staff/Supportships HMS Gålö, HMS Carlskrona
5th Submarine Flottilla 3 type NÄCKEN class
Helicopter Wing
1st Helo Div 6 type Hkp 4C, 4 type Hkp 6
3rd Helo Div 6 type Hkp 4C, 4 type Hkp 6
2nd Helo Sqd 2 type Hkp 4C, 2 type Hkp 6
Naval Forces : Sweden-99
1. Submarine group 3x Västergötland, 2x Gotland
2. Surface Attack Flottilla
20th Missileboat Division, 1 type NORRKÖPING class, 1 type STOCKHOLM class
23th Small ASW-boat Division, 2 type KAPAREN class
3. Surface Attack Flottilla
31st Missileboat Division, 2 type GÖTEBORG class
34th Missileboat Division, 2 type NORRKÖPING class, 2 type HUGIN class
36th Small ASW-boat Division, 2 type KAPAREN class
4th MCM Flotilla
41st MCM Division
411st MCM Squadron
416th Boyeboat Squadron
Staff/Supportships HMS Utö
42nd MCM Division
422nd MCM Squadron
426th Boyeboat Squadron
Staff/Supportships HMS Carlskrona
Helo Wing
1st Helo Div 4 type Hkp 4C, 3 type Hkp 6
3rd Helo Div 4 type Hkp 4C, 4 type Hkp 6
2nd Helo Sqd 2 type Hkp 6
Taken from my webpages. I gonna dig deap into my files to give you the name of the vessels from Sweden-97.
Antenna
__________________
I can only make one person happy per day...
Today ain't your day...
Tomorrow seems to be a bad day also...
Antenna
Visit Antenna's homepage!
************
chico20854
Antenna-
Do you have a timeline of the Soviet-Swedish conflict?
For the battles in the Norwegian Sea it is important whether the Soviet bombers can overfly Sweden and how viable is Spetsnaz infiltration through Sweden to attack Narvik etc from the land side (not easy I know... I've walked through Padjelanta and Sarek!).
If Sweden is held neutral like Finland is until later in the war then that complicates things for the USSR.
Thanks (and thanks for the Swedish fleet list)!
-Chico
**************
Antenna
I tell you what walking thru Northern Sweden to attack Narvik would be suicide for any spetznas. I would put the 'nazers in a U-boat and land them near narvik instead.
Antenna
__________________
I can only make one person happy per day...
Today ain't your day...
Tomorrow seems to be a bad day also...
Antenna
Visit Antenna's homepage!
************
Stilleto69
Originally posted by Chico
>>I'm also doing a little more research on Soviet weapons systems, things that the West wasn't aware of such as the Shval 200-knot torpedo. (This relates to the basic issue of how come canon NATO naval losses are so high.)<<
Great thought Chico, but I think that even if the Soviets were developing such weapons, the CIA, MI5/MI6 or other Western intelligence agencies would either try to get an agent inside or find one of the disgruntled scientist working on the project to help us.
Stilleto69
************
chico20854
I've been a little deficient in posting naval fleet lists, so here comes one:
Soviet Amphibious Warfare Fleet, Twilight War, 1 OCT 1996
Name/Hull No. Name Soviet Type NATO Type Soviet Project NATO Class Fleet Yr Completed Notes
Project 1174
Ivan Rogov Ivan Rogov BDK LPD 1174 Ivan Rogov Pacific 1978
Aleksandr Nikolayev Ivan Rogov BDK LPD 1174 Ivan Rogov Pacific 1982
Mitrofan Moskalenko Ivan Rogov BDK LPD 1174 Ivan Rogov Northern 1990
Project 775 (NATO: Ropucha)
BDK-151 Nikolay Koraskov BDK LST 775 Ropucha Northern 1984 121st Landing Bde
BDK-100 BDK LST 775 Ropucha Black 1980 197th Landing Bde
BDK-101 Zemlyansk BDK LST 775 Ropucha Pacific 1980 100th Landing Bde
BDK-105 BDK LST 775 Ropucha Baltic 1983 71st Landing Bde
BDK-14 BDK LST 775M Ropucha II Pacific 1991 100th Landing Bde
BDK-121 Aleksandr Shabalin BDK LST 775 Ropucha Baltic 1983 71st Landing Bde
BDK-122 BDK LST 775M Ropucha II Baltic 1991 71st Landing Bde
BDK-14 Mukhtar Avezov BDK LST 775 Ropucha Pacific 1975 100th Landing Bde
BDK-182 Bobruisk BDK LST 775 Ropucha Northern 1983 121st Landing Bde
BDK-200 BDK LST 775 Ropucha Northern 1984 121st Landing Bde
BDK-32 BDK LST 775 Ropucha Northern 1975 121st Landing Bde
BDK-43 BDK LST 775 Ropucha Baltic 1976 71st Landing Bde
BDK-45 Grigori Pobedenosets BDK LST 775 Ropucha Northern 1976 121st Landing Bde
BDK-46 BDK LST 775 Ropucha Black 1976 197th Landing Bde
BDK-47 BDK LST 775 Ropucha Baltic 1977 71st Landing Bde
BDK-54 BDK LST 775M Ropucha II Black 1990 197th Landing Bde
BDK-55 Aleksandr Otrakovski BDK LST 775 Ropucha Northern 1977 121st Landing Bde
BDK-56 Konstantin Olshansky BDK LST 775 Ropucha Black 1985 197th Landing Bde
BDK-58 Kaliningrad BDK LST 775 Ropucha Baltic 1977 71st Landing Bde
BDK-60 BDK LST 775 Ropucha Baltic 1978 71st Landing Bde
BDK-63 BDK LST 775 Ropucha Pacific 1979 100th Landing Bde
BDK-64 Tsesar Kunikov BDK LST 775 Ropucha Black 1984 197th Landing Bde
BDK-67 Yamal BDK LST 775 Ropucha Black 1978 197th Landing Bde
BDK-91 Olegenorski Gornyak BDK LST 775 Ropucha Northern 1982 121st Landing Bde
BDK-98 BDK LST 775 Ropucha Pacific 1982 100th Landing Bde
Project 1171 (NATO: Alligator)
BDK-66 Sergei Lazo BDK LST 1171 Alligator Pacific 1968 Type II
Aleksandr Tortsev BDK LST 1171 Alligator Pacific 1968 Type III
Donetsky Shakhter BDK LST 1171 Alligator Baltic 1969 Type III
Nikolay Fil'chenkov BDK LST 1171 Alligator Black 1975 Type IV
Krasnaya Presnaya BDK LST 1171 Alligator Baltic 1974 Type III
BDK-69 Nikolay Obyekov BDK LST 1171 Alligator Black 1969 Type II
Nikolay Vilkov BDK LST 1171 Alligator Pacific 1974 Type IV
BDK-104 Il'ya Azarov BDK LST 1171 Alligator Black 1974 Type III
BDK-25 Tomskiy Komsomolets BDK LST 1171 Alligator Pacific 1967 Type I
BDK-6 Krymskiy Komsomolets BDK LST 1171 Alligator Black 1966 Type I
BDK-62 Komsomolets Karelyy BDK LST 1171 Alligator Baltic 1967 Type I
BDK-65 Voronezhskiy Komsomolets BDK LST 1171 Alligator Black 1966 Type I
BDK-77 Petr Ilichev BDK LST 1171 Alligator 1969 Type III
BDK-80 50 Let Sheftsva VLKSM BDK LST 1171 Alligator Pacific 1975 Type III
Project 770 Polnocny A
SDK-10 SDK LSM 770 Polnocny A Baltic
SDK-2 SDK LSM 770 Polnocny A Baltic
SDK-21 SDK LSM 770 Polnocny A Baltic
SDK-24 SDK LSM 770 Polnocny A Baltic
MDK-36 SDK LSM 770 Polnocny A Caspian
MDK-37 SDK LSM 770 Polnocny A Caspian
SDK-7 SDK LSM 770 Polnocny A Baltic
Project 771 Polnocny B
MDK-107 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B Caspian 1970
MDK-69 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B Caspian 1967
SDK-111 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B Pacific 1968
SDK-112 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B 1969
SDK-119 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B Baltic 1970
SDK-120 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B 1969
SDK-121 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B 1970
SDK-137 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B Black 1971
SDK-156 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B Baltic 1969
SDK-102 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B Black 1971
SDK-171 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B 1969
SDK-172 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B Pacific 1971
SDK-19 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B 1967
SDK-44 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B 1967
SDK-45 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B 1967
SDK-70 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B 1968
SDK-71 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B 1968
SDK-73 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B Black 1970
SDK-74 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B 1968
SDK-79 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B Baltic 1969
SDK-83 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B Black 1969
SDK-84 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B 1968
SDK-96 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B Black 1970
SDK-99 SDK LSM 771 Polnocny B Pacific 1970
Project 773 Polnocny C
SDK-154 SDK LSM 773 Polnocny C Black 1971
SDK-135 SDK LSM 773 Polnocny C Pacific 1972
SDK-164 SDK LSM 773 Polnocny C Black 1974
SDK-20 SDK LSM 773 Polnocny C 1972
SDK-22 SDK LSM 773 Polnocny C 1972
SDK-61 SDK LSM 773 Polnocny C 1973
SDK-72 SDK LSM 773 Polnocny C 1973
SDK-82 SDK LSM 773 Polnocny C Black 1974
Project 1232.2 Zubr
Pomornik class
Amphibious landing craft (hovercraft)
? MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik Pacific 1988
MDK-104 MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik Pacific 1988
MDK-106 MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik Pacific 1989
MDK-109 MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik Baltic 1990
MDK-116 MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik Baltic 1991
MDK-117 MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik Baltic 1992
MDK-118 MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik Baltic 1993
MDK-122 (Ivan Bohun) MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik Black 1990
MDK-123 MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik Black 1994
? MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik Black 1987
MDK-93 MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik Black 1988
MDK-94 MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik Black 1989
MDK-95 MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik Baltic 1986
MDK-97 MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik Pacific 1987
MDK-50 MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik Pacific 1991
MDK-108 MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik 1992
? MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik 1993
?? MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik 1994
??? MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik 1995
???? MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik 1996
????? MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik 1995
?????? MDK LCAC 1232.2 Pomornik 1996
Project 1232.1 Aist
Dzheryan class
Amphibious landing craft (hovercraft)
MDK-9 MDK LCAC 1232.1 Aist Black 1971
MDK-16 MDK LCAC 1232.1 Aist Black 1972
MDK-57 MDK LCAC 1232.1 Aist Black 1974
MDK-82 MDK LCAC 1232.1 Aist Baltic 1975
MDK-89 MDK LCAC 1232.1 Aist Black 1977
MDK-102 MDK LCAC 1232.1 Aist Baltic 1978
MDK-103 MDK LCAC 1232.1 Aist Baltic 1979
MDK-117 MDK LCAC 1232.1 Aist Baltic 1980
MDK-88 MDK LCAC 1232.1 Aist Caspian 1981
MDK-162 MDK LCAC 1232.1 Aist Black 1981
MDK-184 MDK LCAC 1232.1 Aist Black 1982
MDK-18 MDK LCAC 1232.1 Aist Caspian 1983
MDK-516 MDK LCAC 1232.1 Aist Baltic 1983
MDK-518 MDK LCAC 1232.1 Aist Baltic 1984
? MDK LCAC 1232.1 Aist 1973
?? MDK LCAC 1232.1 Aist 1976
??? MDK LCAC 1232.1 Aist 1985
???? MDK LCAC 1232.1 Aist 1986
Bol'shoy Desatnyy Korabl' (BDK): Large Landing Ship
Mal'yy Desantyy Korabl' (MDK): Small Landing Ship
Sredniy Desantyy Korabl' (SDK): Medium Landing Ship
chico20854
************
Targan
I want to suggest a couple of potential causes for T2K canon's unlikely virtual annihilation of NATO's (and specifically the USN's) surface and subsurface fleets during the hot phase of the Twilight War. Bear in mind this is a "devil's advocate" post and some of these suggestions may seem improbable.
1) For whatever reasons NATO's war planners had underestimated the size, geographic coverage and or combat effectiveness of the WarPac's various anti-ship, anti-air and anti-sub capable assets. Perhaps the Soviets had very carefully reduced the non-combat effectiveness of their hardware and personnel when not engaged in major conflict, to deceive opposing intelligence analysts. Perhaps NATO had over-estimated its own potency. Perhaps some unexpected consequence of major events during the war enhanced WarPac's potency while retarding NATO's.
2) The WarPac forces, or most likely the Soviets, had secretly developed some key weapons, vehicles or other hardware, managed to keep its existance a secret, and enjoyed unexpected operation success once the war got nasty. More on this option in a later post.
3) A significant proportion of NATO's fleet losses, certainly far larger than suspected by NATO, were inflicted by a third (ostensibly neutral) party or parties such as the French and/or the Japanese. This option may contain elemnts of option (2), in that the third party had secretly developed key weapons or vehicles in secret or demonstrated greater than expected capabilities with known systems. For instance, what if French Govt decided that if the Soviet Navy was going to be effectively destroyed, it would be best for NATO's naval strength to be greatly reduced as well. Unless you capture or destroy an attacking sub it has got to be tough to positively determine what force sank your carrier, and NATO's (understandable) assumption for most losses would be that they were inflicted by WarPac forces.
__________________
"I say we take off and nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure" - Corporal Dwayne Hicks, Colonial Marine Corp
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by Targan : 03-17-2006 at 08:17 AM.
Targan
************
Targan
Further to scenario (2) in my previous post, the biggest questions would be what sort of secret weapons systems could the WarPac have fielded during the Twilight War capable of causing such profound effects on NATO's naval assets, and how could the Soviets keep these weapon systems secret?
I think one of the most realistic methods of maintaining secrecy is the method practiced by many owners of newly built castles during mediaeval times - having their architect and associated workers killed at completion to prevent them from revealing any secret passages or providing the enemy with accurate floor plans. Another strategy could be deliberately keeping the number of people involved in a weapon's development small, with projects knowingly sanctioned and resourced by higher authorities who have agreed not to seek information or disseminate knowledge of projects' existance. Given that the Soviet government demonstrated a capacity for thinking quite far ahead, some projects could have slowly advanced for decades while maintaining a low population of participants.
As for the weapons themselves, things like the 200 knot torpedo are good candidates, but what about ortillery (Cyberpunk 2020's name for orbital artillery)? The actual launchers and projectiles could be suprisingly low tech and simple, with only the launcher's station keeping, targeting and communications systems requiring any real sophistication. Simple but effective ortillery munitions would look much like steel crowbars and could be cold-launched using springs or compressed gas, achieving impressive velocities during reentry and arriving on target as a superheated AP penetartor wreathed in a shroud of of metal plasma. Quite accurate geographically but usually unguided and requiring a relatively long flight time. The flight time is not so much of a problem when you are aiming at an aircraft carrier, however. The components for ortillery satellites could have been ferried out of the gravity well in small parcels accompanying any of the hundreds of manned and unmanned space launches conducted by the Soviets over the decades. A far sighted planner would start with the simple components such as projectile packs and launch components, with the complete systems being assembled only in recent years or perhaps even right at the start of the Sino-Soviet War.
__________________
"I say we take off and nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure" - Corporal Dwayne Hicks, Colonial Marine Corp
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by Targan : 03-17-2006 at 09:04 PM.
Targan
************
BnF95
Out of curiousity, wouldn't the USSR have moved part of their Atlantic fleet over to the Pacific because of their war with the PRC?
__________________
Trivia: The word F.U.C.K. comes from the abbreviation used by English Police back in the 1880's. When a person was arrested for sex with another person (who is not their wedded partner) they would be charged with For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge
BnF95
************
Matt Wiser
Doubtful; the Soviet Pacific Fleet had enough of a superiority over the PLAN that reinforcement from Northern, Baltic, or Black Sea Fleets wasn't needed. The PRC still doesn't have a real blue-water navy, and as discussed in the old threads on the Sino-Soviet War, the Soviets inflict a lot of losses on the PLAN with the forces available. ROE for attacking PRC warships would have been pretty lenient, but when faced with merchantmen taking war materiel to China, they would have been limited for political reasons to only attacking PRC-flagged ships. And you'd have to get a visual on the target before attacking (ship-based helos are good for that). Of course, most war materiel being sent to the PRC goes in third-country shipping, which the Soviets are, as Webstral has indicated, reluctant to stop because they don't want a wider war. Not to mention no air or naval activity anywhere near Macao and Hong Kong-that would bring in the West. (Freedom of Navigation, protection of neutral shipping, etc.)
Matt Wiser
************
chico20854
On the Soviet Pacific fleet, I envision them making greater use of their facilities in Vietnam. They had a small squadron in the 80s operating from Cahm Ran Bay and had a short regiment of Badgers operating from DaNang. For the Sino-Soviet War, they could use the DaNang base to run through missions, deeper into China than otherwise possible or with greater weapons loads (having to transit a shorter distance after munitions use). The Soviet naval superiority along with nominal compliance with the principles of free navigation would permit the USSR to run convoys down the China coast to resupply the bases in Vietnam (and allowing the Soviet bombers at DaNang to return to the USSR with a full load of munitions to drop off on the way). If a Soviet convoy happens to locate a Chinese one (or Chinese naval forces) they can engage or call in other Soviet units... free "innocent" intelligence gathering. In the weeks leading up to the expansion of the war in the West, the base in Vietnam can be built up even further to permit more extended autonomous operations. (More detail when I finish my Soviet strategy piece!)
As far as the advanced weapons, I have a few ideas. The 200-knot torpedo and it's follow on are on my list of balance-changers, along with wake-homing torpedos (no real effective countermeasure for that was ever developed) and extensive mining, which NATO never really got an effective handle on. I hadn't put much thought into orbiting systems, other than as recon assets. I like the idea of FOBS (nukes in orbit to induce EMP) being in service, even though they were officially retired. Also Soviet coastal artillery had some tricks up their sleaves when it came to the Battle of the Kola Peninsula - land based SS-N-22 Sunburns (remember how effective Scud hunts were in the open desert? Try it in fjords with smaller targets under a better air defense umbrella!)
There was also an element of Western misunderstanding re: Soviet naval capabilities. NATO looked at readiness meaning that crews are well trained in the operation of their vessels, developed by extensive practical exercises and long deployments or exercises at sea. The USSR saw naval readiness as meaning a ship is ready to go to sea at a few hours notice and engage in combat. Sending ships to sea in peacetime would result in greater wear and tear on the ships, requiring time in the yard when they would be unable to eneter combat rapidly. With conscripts on short enlistments and limited procurement rubles, there is not much sense in wearing out your navy's ships while still only having a marginally effective fleet. As my strategic work will explain, NATO up until the mid 1980s fundamentally misunderstood Soviet intentions at sea, essentially replacing Germany with the USSR in its "WW III as the repeat of the WW II Battle of the Atlantic" concept of operations.
chico20854
************
Matt Wiser
As it turned out, in the late '80s NATO did get info on wake-homing torpedoes-some of the reference books from that time do mention the Type-65 "Long Lanceski" as a wake-homer, along with some of the standard 21" fish as wake-homing as well. The Type-65 is a big 26.5" torpedo with a range of up to 40 miles, and either a passive homing guidance, or wake-homing. Nuke or conventional warhead.
A possible shore-based missile is the SS-NX-24, development of which was stopped in '91. Check strategypage.com-India bought the rights to the missile, and paid for the development costs. They call the missile the Brahmos. Iran and the PRC are said to be very interested. Try globalsecurity or astronautix.com as well-they should have additional info.
It may be a second-strike nuclear system for the Indians...besides conventional warhead versions.
Even with some additional Soviet weapons, I still don't buy the wholesale decimation of the USN. Even if most of the surviving ships can't go to sea due to lack of fuel, more of the Navy should still be around. Other than nuclear-powered vessels, the only ships with fuel would be those in the Persian Gulf with the 5th Fleet, and those based in the SF Bay Area.
Matt Wiser
************
DeaconR
Matt: why not take this idea...in my game the Soviets actually are defeated on the naval front. However the lack of infrastructure and steady fuel shipments mean that the NATO fleets are not running to full capacity. You don't even have to explain what this means to your players, you can simply make the information largely unavailable. However if you need to have a ship pick them up on some godforsaken coastline or assist in some operation if, as I do, you have them working with government forces as opposed to cast totally adrift, then you got it. I've never suggested that the NATO fleets were decimated. Rather I have on occasion the chimera of the Soviet and Pact fleets, which mostly results in a stray that has gone pirate or something. And I think that the game writers were mostly just trying to make aircraft and naval power unavailable. But you don't need that extreme an idea to make that notion work. In any actual war or conflict there can be things that aren't available to people in the field.
Also you might have outside the Gulf or the Bay fleets at anchor or whatever which had just a couple of ships on active duty and perhaps others ready to be refurbished should the need arise.
It's fairly easy for me: I'm running my game on the Atlantic Coast/New England of course and so the focus is on the captured sub and Bigelow with the smaller ships doing most of the main duties.
Is your game the one set on the NW Pacific or what?
DeaconR
************
Matt Wiser
I posted some stuff a while back about the Navy: some surviving carriers and their escorts, some amphibs, and the surviving boomers and SSNs. Also what happened to the battleships and the two Des Moines class heavy cruisers.
Air and naval support should not be unavailable, but rare. You'd better have a very good reason to put those assets into play. Even with Persian Gulf and California oil still pumping and limited refining, Jet fuel doesn't grow on trees, and you'd better have a good reason for calling for air support or extraction.
Ditto for naval support.
One of the posts I did had U.S.S. Constellation (CV-64) and her battle group anchored at Guam: they have fuel, but only enough to get home, but CINC-PACCOM wants the carrier to be ready to cover any pullout from Korea. There's also one of the Amphibs with a provisional MEU as well-they were headed for Korea when the ICBMs flew, and they made port in Guam. Another amphib operates out of Hilo, Hawaii, with a Forrest Sherman DD as escort-they have fuel for limited ops, but the U.S.S. Wisconsin (BB-64) is in port in Hilo, with a torpedo hole in her bow, limited fuel, and no drydock. But the two other ships "show the flag" in Hawaiian waters, and the Marines aboard U.S.S Essex (LHD-2) support the 29th Infantry Brigade (HI NG).
Matt Wiser
************
DeaconR
What you're suggesting makes sense, Matt. Looking at that guy Nathan Decker's site I was trying to come up with what modern ships would be available to be in and around South Carolina/Georgia/Florida. Still working on that but I'm away at a wedding for the weekend and of course didn't bring Jane's with me. If anyone has any offhand ideas about that I'd be appreciative, though I had already come up with wanting Barnstable County and Audacity among the vessels available.
Targan: I will address the space question in another thread.
DeaconR
************
Matt Wiser
One can also make the argument that the surviving naval assets on both the East and West coasts are now national-level assets. Which means the CNO in Colorado Springs (or Denver) makes the call as to where and when to send surviving surface ships and subs to sea, and for what mission(s). The ships left in Europe, the Far East, and in the Gulf are still under the appropriate theather naval commander. For the boomers, things haven't changed very much: they still go to sea and await orders. One SSN that still has an exciting life is U.S.S. Parche (SSN-687). She is based out of the Trident Sub Base in Bangor, WA, and she has a SEAL platoon assigned; her missions are still highly classified. When she returns from a cruise, she first arrives in the covered drydock at the base, where it is rumored that items recovered on her operations are offloaded. Only after a period in the covered dock does she moor at a pier.
Matt Wiser
************
BnF95
How many carriers did the various nations have during 1991-1994 era?
__________________
Trivia: The word F.U.C.K. comes from the abbreviation used by English Police back in the 1880's. When a person was arrested for sex with another person (who is not their wedded partner) they would be charged with For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge
BnF95
************
Targan
Quote:
Originally Posted by BnF95
How many carriers did the various nations have during 1991-1994 era?
|
Check out post#4 this thread for the US carriers according to GraebardeII, and the various naval OOBs posted recently in these forums for other nations.
__________________
"I say we take off and nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure" - Corporal Dwayne Hicks, Colonial Marine Corp
Targan
************
BnF95
I did, but if I remember correctly, which I doubt, the French, Indians, and Australians also have carriers yes?
__________________
Trivia: The word F.U.C.K. comes from the abbreviation used by English Police back in the 1880's. When a person was arrested for sex with another person (who is not their wedded partner) they would be charged with For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge
BnF95
************
Targan
Australia once had an aircraft carrier, the HMAS Melbourne, but the government decided that although the nation's primary multi-role jet fighters are carrier-capable FA/18s, and Australia has the largest coastline of any nation in the world, we didn't need an aircraft carrier and sold it for scrap. Well, the government thought they had sold it for scrap. Now apparently the Chinese military have the Melbourne and are using it to train carrier pilots. You will have to excuse me for a moment, every time I think about that situation I suffer an overwhelming urge to bang my head against a hard surface until the pain goes away. Ah heck, that's no where near as concerning as the Australian government's tacit approval for future sales of Australian uranium to China. Who knows, perhaps one day the Chinese will refine it and send it back, in MIRVs, from sub-orbit.
France has a carrier or two and some helicopter carriers. India has a carrier and is organising more. But all of the carriers in the world combined come nowhere close to matching the overall tonnage of the US carrier fleet. Now that's gunboat diplomacy!
__________________
"I say we take off and nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure" - Corporal Dwayne Hicks, Colonial Marine Corp
Targan
************
thefusilier
Quote:
Originally Posted by BnF95
I did, but if I remember correctly, which I doubt, the French, Indians, and Australians also have carriers yes?
|
So does Argentina, Spain, Italy, Britain (3), and Thailand. Brazil too I think... check the other naval posts.
__________________
The Fusilier
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by thefusilier : 03-23-2006 at 05:27 AM.
thefusilier
************
ChalkLine
Quote:
Originally Posted by Targan
Well, the government thought they had sold it for scrap. Now apparently the Chinese military have the Melbourne and are using it to train carrier pilots.
|
Actually, the Melbourne was scrapped but the Chinese went over it with a fine-tooth comb to learn engineering data from first. Of course, she was an old Invincible class ship so there wasn't much they really could learn that you couldn't learn from any other 60's era ship, but it was done with the collusion of our government in defiance of the post-Tienammin weapon sales bans (every Western nation defied those, even those governments that proposed them.)
__________________
ChalkLine
************
Targan
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChalkLine
Actually, the Melbourne was scrapped but the Chinese went over it with a fine-tooth comb to learn engineering data... but it was done with the collusion of our government in defiance of the post-Tienammin weapon sales bans...
|
Gotcha. But it is still appropriate for me to rant, right?
__________________
"I say we take off and nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure" - Corporal Dwayne Hicks, Colonial Marine Corp
Targan
************
chico20854
In my naval oobs, I have the following carriers:
USA: 18 CVs and CVNs, 4 Essex-class (1 was training, 3 brought from reserve), 7 LPHs, 5 LHAs, 8 LHDs
UK: 3 Invincible class, plus Engadine, Argus and Ocean.
France: Charles DeGaulle, Foch and Clemenceau (IRL 1 of the older ones was retired, but not during a war!)
USSR: 2 Moscow-class, 4 Kiev-class, 2 Tblisi-class and Ulyanovsk.
Italy: Garibaldi and Mazzini (planned in the early 90s, continually delayed IRL)
Spain: 1 modern carrier, possibly old WWII escort carrier (Dedalo, seperate thread on this one...)
Thailand: 1
India: 2 (IRL one was decommissioned Jan 97)
Brazil: 1
Argentina: 1
NATO forces also convert a number of large container ships to escort carriers (using the Arapaho project materials/techniques) flying ASW and AEW helos and Harriers.
A related issue with the larger number of carriers (from speeding up production and retaining older ships) is the availability of aircraft and crew. The French, for example, in the 1980s operated fixed-wing aircraft off of only 1 carrier to save money, using the second only for helos. Add in a third carrier and you have more space for aircraft than you have aircraft and aircrews to fly. With everyone trying to get more harriers (for the smaller ships) there's going to be a crunch and some smaller navies will be left out. Finally, if you aren't going to have a draft (nad even if you do!) you're going to have a tough time finding enough crewmen for all those ships. (And a draft only helps a little... you need experienced officers and NCOs, especially mid-grades, who aren't available in general as retirees and can't be magically created from drafted civilians).
And Targan, you wouldn't believe the mess and minor scandals that have accompanied the disposal of old carriers in the US. We sank USS America in a secret munitions exercise and pissed off the former crewmen, Coral Sea was scrapped with the usual environmental mess (and featured some unaccounted for 500-lb bombs squirreled away!) and the Oriskany, to be sunk as an artificial reef, has been tied up in the courts for years!
-Chico
chico20854
************
thefusilier
Chico what are the Engadine, Argus and Ocean?
Ocean being the latest Commando Carrier they have now?
__________________
The Fusilier
thefusilier
************
chico20854
Engadine was a RN helicopter training ship. It was used as a transit deck during the Falklands... Harriers deploying from the UK to Ascension could land for a refuel. It had a deck that could land 4 helos. IRL decommissioned in 89, scrapped in 96.
Argus was a container ship that was converted to an aircraft transport for the Falklands. After the war the RN kept her and used her to to train helo pilots (allowing Engadine to be retired), as an assault ship and as a hospital ship. 5 helos up to Chinook size, can land Harriers, probably can transport more than 5 helos.
HMS Ocean is the RN's newest LPH. IRL it's delivery was delayed due to politics, not enough money, etc, commissioning in 98. For T2k it was in commissioned in 95. 18 helos (12 Sea Kings, 6 Lynx).
All these ships have the ability to fly harriers but not really to support them - maintenance, munitions, liquid oxygen, command & control, etc. But they are easier to adapt than a civilian container ship. And as I dig deeper I see that the air threat to the convoy lanes in most of the world is pretty light, so a few harriers will be more than enough (and where it's heavy whether you have a few or a lot of harriers it still doesn't matter you're going to get hit)!
chico20854
************
thefusilier
Thanks.
__________________
The Fusilier
thefusilier
************
ChalkLine
Quote:
Originally Posted by Targan
Gotcha. But it is still appropriate for me to rant, right?
|
Oh yeah, I'm just being my usual nit-picking self, I don't want anyone putting the Melbourne into Chinese OOBs.
The flagrant multinational defiance of those weapons bans makes me sick, it just goes to show that where money is concerned, legality goes out the window (anyone heard of the Australian Wheat Board?)
__________________
ChalkLine
************
Targan
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChalkLine
Oh yeah, I'm just being my usual nit-picking self, I don't want anyone putting the Melbourne into Chinese OOBs.
The flagrant multinational defiance of those weapons bans makes me sick, it just goes to show that where money is concerned, legality goes out the window (anyone heard of the Australian Wheat Board?)
|
Oh yeah, AWB, Australians Willingly Bribe. I play a fair bit of Battlefield 2 on-line, and when I'm in a battle where I'm playing on the Middle East side I often call my squad "AWB's Guns".