US 2nd Fleet Questions

[kalos72]

Hey team!

It's my limited understanding that the Us 2nd fleet would have been responsible for Central America / Panama in 1997-1999 timelines.

My team is working on a storyline where the US decides to secure the Panama Canal and reinforce the 193rd with something along the lines of a NMBC, a Ranger Company and all the Puerto Rican National Guard but are stuck on the Naval options.

What might a Naval Task Force look like if they were sent to help secure the Panama Canal?

We were thinking, a couple of Coast Guard cutters, a few LA Class subs and a couple of older Spruance class Destroyers maybe? Would other larger ships be involved, maybe a Wasp class or something? What about support craft?

We would LOVE the Independance Carrier Group but I think that is might be too much, even if I dont understand what a Carrier Group would truly consist of in 1999.

[dragoon500ly]

Well, best source material is "The Ships and Aircraft of the U. S. Fleet".

The Second FLEET consists of:
Task Force 20 (Battle Force)
TF 21 (Sea Control and Surveillance Force)
TF 22 (Amphibious Force)
TF 23 (Landing Force)
TF 24 (Anti Submarine Warfare)
TF 25 (Mobile Logistics Support Force)
TF 26 (Patrol Air Force)
TF 28 (Caribbean Contingency Force)

From Atlantic Fleet Command:
TF 134 (Naval Forces Caribbean)
Carrier Group 2 (CV43, CV66 America)
Carrier Group 4 (CV67 John F. Kennedy)
Carrier Group 6 (CV59 Forrestal, CV60 Saratoga)
Carrier Group 8 (CVN 68 Nimitz, CVN 69 Dwight D. Eisenhower)
Naval Air Force:
CV 62 Independence, undergoing SLEP modernization
CVN 71 Theodore Roosevelt, working up
AVT 16 Lexington, training carrier

For a Caribbean (Canal Zone) operation, TF28 would most likely consist of frigates and cutters and possibly, an older destroyer. It would be reinforced by task groups from TF 22,23,24,25 and 26. If the threat has large enough, either a task group from TF 134, or even the entire task force, this would probably consist of a guided missile cruiser, 1-3 guided missile destroyers, a ASW destroyer and 2-3 frigates. The exact force level for TF 134 would be expected to vary wily (depending on what was immediately available and capable of putting to sea.

A Carrier Battle Group would consist of a single carrier, 2-3 guided missile cruisers, 3-4 destroyers, 3-4 frigates and 0-2 nuclear submarines. Escorts would depend on availability and threat level.

Now Independence, during this period, was Pacific Fleet, Carrier Battle Group 5, this would consist of:
Independence with
Carrier Air Wing 5: VF 21 (10 F-14A), VF-154 (10 F-14A), VFA-192
(10 F/A-18C), VFA-195 (10 F/A-18C), VS-115 (14 A-6E), VAQ-136 (4 EA-6B),
VAW-115 (4 E-2C), VS-21 (6 S-3B), HS-12 (5 SH-3H)

Bunker Hill and Mobile Bay (Bunker Hill-class CG)
Hewitt, O`Brien and Fife (Spruance-class DD)
Curts, McClusky, Thach and Rodney M. Davis (Perry-class FFG)

Carrier Battle Group 6 is Atlantic Fleet:
America with
Carrier Air Wing 1:VF-33 (14 F-14A), VMFA-122 (10 F/A-18C), VFA-82 (10
F/A-18C), VFA-86 (10 F/A-18C), VA-85 (16 A-6E), VMAQ-1 (4 EA-6B),
VAW-123 (4 E-2C), VS-32 (6 S-3B), HS-11 (6 SH-3H)
South Carolina (California-class CGN)
Normandy, Monterey (Bunker Hill-class CG)
McDonough (Farragut-class DDG)
Scott (Kidd-class DDG)
John Hancock, Thorn (Spruance-class DD)
Boone, Aunty Fitch, Jesse L. Taylor, Simpson (Perry-class FFG)
Groton, Alexandria (Los Angeles-class SSN)

Hope this helps!

[kalos72]

For as many questions as I ask, I think I need to buy a copy of that book.

So you are thinking any naval support for this operation in 1997 would come from Carrier Group 6 with the America?

Do you think sending a full Carrier Group to support an operation securing the Panama Canal si too much? Would the Carrier Group stay in the Caribbean if the naval loses some have touted were actually happening?

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by kalos72

For as many questions as I ask, I think I need to buy a copy of that book.

So you are thinking any naval support for this operation in 1997 would come from Carrier Group 6 with the America?

Do you think sending a full Carrier Group to support an operation securing the Panama Canal si too much? Would the Carrier Group stay in the Caribbean if the naval loses some have touted were actually happening?

I just picked USS America out of the 9 carriers assigned to the Atlantic Fleets. Mostly picked her because she has a mixed USN/USMC air wing.

From what I understand of real Fleet operations in the 1990s, carriers were heavily protected, no less than two AEGIS cruisers for anti-air, supported by DDGs with Spruance/Perry's/nuke submarines for ASW defensive, the carrier battle groups were considered to be tough targets. This doesn't mean that a sub couldn't get in a lucky shot, but it was widely accepted that if you wanted a carrier, you would pay heavily.

Now, for a target such as the Canal, depending on what is defending, it would be more likely that two or more CBGs would be assigned, striking each end of the Canal, with airborne elements seizing the locks and pumping stations. Considering the strategic importance of the Panama Canal to the US, it would be a major effort, unless the Soviets decided a couple of nukes would be a more effective solution.

As for the books, try Amazon, they keep looking up at some very reasonable prices. The 2001 edition of Combat Fleets of the World, normally 900.00, went for 21.00 plus shipping!!!!!!

[dragoon500ly]

The USMC during this time frame has an active component comprised of three infantry divisions, three air wings and three force service support groups.

Each Marine division consists of three infantry regiments, one artillery regiment and several combat and support battalions, each infantry regiment is, in turn, made up of three infantry battalions, each with three rifle companies.

Since the mid-1970s, the Marines have stressed the concept of Marine Air-Ground Task Force (MAGTF) organizations, which provides for combined arms at all levels of force deployments.

As of 1992, the Marines operate three MAGTF organizations:

Marine Amphibious Unit (MAU): consisting of a battalion landing team, a composite air squadron and a MAU service support group with some 2,506 personnel and requiring 4-6 amphibious ships for transport.

Marine Amphibious Brigade (MAB): consisting of a regimental landing team, a composite air group and a brigade service support group with some 15,670 personnel and requiring 21-26 amphibious ships.

Marine Amphibious Force (MAF): consisting of a Marine division, a Air Wing, and a force service support group with 50,600 personnel and requiring 50 amphibious ships for transport.

With the 1992 level personnel and equipment totals, the USMC could field 2-3 MAFs or up to 6 MABs or up to 12 MAUs.

The USMC currently fields the following:
1st MAB for use with Indian Ocean Maritime Pre-positioning Squadron (MPS).
4th MAB at Camp Lejeune, NC for deployment to Norway.
5th MAB at Camp Pendleton and 7th MAB at 29 Palms (both California) for use with MPS.
6th MAB at Camp Lejeune, NC for MPS duty in the Atlantic.
9th MAB at Okinawa.
11th MAU and 13th MAU for rotateing deployments with Seventh Fleet.
22nd, 24th and 26th MAUs at Camp Lejeune, NC for rotating deployments with Sixth Fleet.

[kalos72]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

I just picked USS America out of the 9 carriers assigned to the Atlantic Fleets. Mostly picked her because she has a mixed USN/USMC air wing.

From what I understand of real Fleet operations in the 1990s, carriers were heavily protected, no less than two AEGIS cruisers for anti-air, supported by DDGs with Spruance/Perry's/nuke submarines for ASW defensive, the carrier battle groups were considered to be tough targets. This doesn't mean that a sub couldn't get in a lucky shot, but it was widely accepted that if you wanted a carrier, you would pay heavily.

Now, for a target such as the Canal, depending on what is defending, it would be more likely that two or more CBGs would be assigned, striking each end of the Canal, with airborne elements seizing the locks and pumping stations. Considering the strategic importance of the Panama Canal to the US, it would be a major effort, unless the Soviets decided a couple of nukes would be a more effective solution.

As for the books, try Amazon, they keep looking up at some very reasonable prices. The 2001 edition of Combat Fleets of the World, normally 900.00, went for 21.00 plus shipping!!!!!!

My campaign has the US defending the Canal, they kept control with the 193rd initially and then moved to strengthen it. in 1997 they were attacked by Anti us protestors in the Panamanian Defense Force and the US moved more forces to the PCZ to defend it.

[mpipes]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

I just picked USS America out of the 9 carriers assigned to the Atlantic Fleets. Mostly picked her because she has a mixed USN/USMC air wing.

From what I understand of real Fleet operations in the 1990s, carriers were heavily protected, no less than two AEGIS cruisers for anti-air, supported by DDGs with Spruance/Perry's/nuke submarines for ASW defensive, the carrier battle groups were considered to be tough targets. This doesn't mean that a sub couldn't get in a lucky shot, but it was widely accepted that if you wanted a carrier, you would pay heavily.

I think I remember reading at some point at one time that the Soviets, even with the most optimistic assessment, expected to lose at least five subs for each carrier they managed to get a torpedo into.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by mpipes

I think I remember reading at some point at one time that the Soviets, even with the most optimistic assessment, expected to lose at least five subs for each carrier they managed to get a torpedo into.

With the fall of the Soviet Union a lot of their military publications started showing up in the West. The general opinion for a successful strike on a CBG was for a coordinated strike with 2-3 SSGNs, 2-4 SS/SSNs and 3-4 regiments of Backfires. The intent was to overwhelm USN defended with missile fire and using torpedoes to finish off survivors.

I've wargamed this several times with some navy buddies and the results have been mixed. One game had the Backfires suffering 80% losses. In another game two frigates and a P-3 managed to nail four submarines in a patrol line. In a weekend game, the heroic Soviets managed to attack from an unexpected direction and sank the carrier with minor losses. We even ran the Clancy scenario with two US and a French carrier against a massive 7 regiment attack, an exercise in mutual slaughter resulted.

[Adm.Lee]

Originally Posted by kalos72

My team is working on a storyline where the US decides to secure the Panama Canal and reinforce the 193rd with something along the lines of a NMBC, a Ranger Company and all the Puerto Rican National Guard but are stuck on the Naval options.

I'm drawing a mental blank: NMBC?

A Ranger company could be drawn from the Ranger School in Florida, plus volunteers?

PR Guard might have its hands full at home by 1999.

[kalos72]

This move would have happened in 1997...I am thinking another Brigade might be needed as well but havent though it through much.

Naval Mobile Construction Battalion - Sorry...

[dragoon500ly]

Running a few thoughts on the order of battle...

193rd Infantry Brigade was headquartered out of Fort Clayton also assigned were:
1-187 Infantryalso at Clayton
2-187 Infantry at Fort Kobbe
Battery D-320 Field Artillery at Kobbe
518th Engineer Company at Kobbe

Attached were
210th Aviation (Combat) at Howard AFB
114th Aviation Company (Combat Support) at Howard
3rd Platoon, 242nd Aviation Company (Medium Helicopter) at Howard

3-7 Special Forces Group at Fort Davis

Jungle Warfare Training Centre at Fort Amadore

Suggested reinforcements include:
53rd Infantry Brigae, FLNG: 1-124 Infantry, 2,124 INF, 3-124 INF, 1-160 FA,
Troop E-153 CAV, 153 ENG Company

92nd Infantry Brigade, PRNG: 1-65 INF, 2-65 INF, 1-195 INF, 2-162 FA, Troop
E-192 CAV, 892 Engineer Company

Both brigades are standard "pure" infantry infantry units, supported by towed 105mm howitzer.

Other units available include 1-196 INF PRNG, Company G-143 INF (Ranger) TXNG, 1136th INF Detachment (Pathfinder/Airborne) TXNG, Company E-65 (Ranger) PRNG, 1-162 FA, PRNG (155T), 1-265 ADS (C-V) FLNG, 131st AVN MSNG.

US Army Reserve can contribute the 448th ENG Bb (Combat Heavy) to complete an interesting little mix.

[kalos72]

Great stuff Dragoon, thanks!

I was thinking along those lines, just wasn't sure of specific units. One thing that always struck me was the shear number of unaccounted for units in Going Home versus the NATO Orbat guides.

The 193rd on the PAC side, the 92nd on the ATL and the 3rd as patrol between? Thats about 10-12k soldiers or thereabouts?

I was adding the Seebees to help with maintaining the locks, would one battalion be enough for all of them over a protracted period of time?

[dragoon500ly]

The two Guard brigades are standard infantry, their component battalions are the 800 man battalions, their artillery battalions are supposed to be 6 tubes batteries of M-101 105mm howitzer.

The 193rd is a bit of a question mark, I've seen it listed as standard infantry and as light infantry, the attached arty battery also shows as 6 or 8 tubes and listed as M-101 howitzer.

Another big question mark are the Rangers, IRL, 1st, 2nd and 3rd battalions are the line units, 4th, 5th and 6th are the training units. Would there have been enough lead time to create additional line battalions? Grabbing surplus cadre from the training units along with the next graduating class might allow a new battalion, but the NG has independent Ranger companies, that EVERYBODY overlooks, not mention the Pathfinder companies, enough personnel to field another battalion.

As far as the engineer support, what I've listed are an engineer combat battalion and the brigade engineer combat companies, with a SeeBee battalion this should be enough to operate the locks, the big question would then be, how badly are the locks damaged? It maybe necessary for an engineer brigade to be deployed for reconstruction.

One thing that always strikes me are the incredible numbers of independent companies and detachments that the Guard and Army Reserve maintains. The last time I sat down to try to get a total number, I reached over 300 before I gave up. Many resources simply list "numerous". Ah well, the Army does thrive on chaos!