Canon module omissions - RDF module

[James Langham]

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

Originally Posted by James1978

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.

[James1978]

Originally Posted by James Langham

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

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.

[Olefin]

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

[Matt Wiser]

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.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six

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

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.

Originally Posted by Olefin

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

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?

[Rainbow Six]

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?

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six

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.

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by Olefin

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.

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.

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

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?

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.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Olefin

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!

[Webstral]

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.

[manunancy]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

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!

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.

[Webstral]

Originally Posted by James1978

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.

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

[James Langham]

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...

Originally Posted by James1978

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.