Recommissioned US Navy ships

[Legbreaker]

The Suez has been discussed a few times before and the consensus seems to be that it's closed. In the mid 50's a number of ships were sunk in the channel blocking it (on the order of Egyptian President Nasser) so we know it's quite possible.
A similar situation could be assumed in T2K - ships sunk, mines laid, and as at least one member of this forum has suggested, the area subjected to nukes.

With regard to the 6,000 troops sent to Iran, this calculator http://www.searates.com/reference/portdistance shows us that at 16 knots, it will take roughly 4 weeks from Bremerhaven to Bandar Abbas via the Cape of Good hope. This works nicely for the December arrival in Iran and CENTCOM's "early Christmas present".

The transit of the Atlantic which was to take ten days (arriving 25th November) requires a speed of 15 knots if the English Channel was taken. Given the hostility of the French as detailed in Boomer, it's more likely TF34 would go up around the north of Scotland (as would the ships bound for the Middle East), thereby requiring a slightly faster pace to still make the planned 10 day transit.

If the Middle East ships were to take the Suez, at that speed they'd arrive way too early, around the 1st or second of December. Admittedly that still fits the December arrival, however I would expect to see that described as "early December" if it was the case.

Could ships make better than 16 knots? Undoubtedly a few certainly could, however convoys are restricted to the slowest vessel. In WWII, this was as little as 3 knots. Something else to remember is the majority of TF34 was made up of "a hodge-podge collection of container ships, general cargo ships and tankers, excursion ships, and smaller vessels felt large enough to survive the crossing". Most of these ships would be lucky to have received much in the way of preventative maintenance since 1997 and it would seem unlikely any would be capable of their full theoretical speed. The John Hancock itself is likely to be suffering battle damage (as would any other military vessels).

6,000 troops is a lot. Even if the Tarawa was available and seaworthy, it's only rated to carry 1,900 marines. Additional ships would certainly be needed (which I propose would be mainly tankers to take advantage of the oil available in the Middle East for the possible voyage back to Germany). A tanker would be needed to accompany these ships too as the Cape of Good Hope route is about 1,000 miles further than the Tarawa's range.

With 33,730 cubic feet available for vehicles, and an M1 tank being approximately 2,500 cubic feet, only about a dozen tanks can fit. Given that restriction, the Omega orders to turn over all vehicles to the Germans and the need to feed and house 6,000 troops for a month, I just can't see any tanks going to Iran even in the unlikely event Tarawa was available.

One other piece of evidence against the Tarawa going to the Middle East is the list of US ships contained in the RDF Sourcebook. Note that the order of battle in that book is as of the 1st of January 2001, only shortly after the arrival of the reinforcements. Note also those reinforcements would have to be included in the OOB presented. There's a very good chance that the majority of the reinforcements would still be in the Bandar Abbas area (not really enough time to disburse them all to their new units).