OT: Seven US aircraft carriers have been sunk in the past 30 years.

[Raellus]

I still have a letter from the U.S. Embassy in Quito to my international (mostly American) school warning parents, staff, and students of possible retaliation for the airliner incident. Those were some pretty tense times. EDIT: I just took another look at it and it was dated September 22, 1987, so it must have been about some of the 'tanker wars' stuff that preceded the IA shoot-down incident. Still, the Soviets weren't America's only antagonists during the '80s.


The T2K v1.0 history cites a fairly decisive battle in the Norwegian sea. My guess is that NATO was trying to support its land operations in northern Norway and/or Finland with naval air and ship/sub launched cruise missiles and the Soviets decided to sortie and hit them with the kitchen sink. The resulting multi-day battle resulted in the de facto destruction of both forces. If the Soviets could neutralize NATO's land-based air in Norway*, it could use it's land-based Backfire, Blackjack, and Fencer naval air fleet to launch ASMs at the approaching NATO naval task forces, while a sizable Red Fleet surface force, screened by subs and missile boats operating out of radar dead spots along Norway's coast, makes a foray into the Norwegian sea.

Another possible explanation is that NATO sent a large force to hit the Soviet anchorages on the Kola Peninsula and the Soviets were forced to throw everything into their defense. In terms of imagination fodder, I much prefer the former scenario.

*I imagine them doing this with Spetsnaz and/or chem weapons.

[Adm.Lee]

The "Boomer" timeline sets the big/final North Sea battle as part of NATO's June '97 offensive towards Murmansk from far-northern Norway. No mention of anti-air activity in Norway, but it's certainly possible. Or, NATO pulled a lot of air into the Central Front battle, since that's getting towards its climax in eastern Poland in June as well.

Originally Posted by Raellus

The T2K v1.0 history cites a fairly decisive battle in the Norwegian sea. My guess is that NATO was trying to support its land operations in northern Norway and/or Finland with naval air and ship/sub launched cruise missiles and the Soviets decided to sortie and hit them with the kitchen sink. The resulting multi-day battle resulted in the de facto destruction of both forces. If the Soviets could neutralize NATO's land-based air in Norway*, it could use it's land-based Backfire, Blackjack, and Fencer naval air fleet to launch ASMs at the approaching NATO naval task forces, while a sizable Red Fleet surface force, screened by subs and missile boats operating out of radar dead spots along Norway's coast, makes a foray into the Norwegian sea.

Another possible explanation is that NATO sent a large force to hit the Soviet anchorages on the Kola Peninsula and the Soviets were forced to throw everything into their defense. In terms of imagination fodder, I much prefer the former scenario.

*I imagine them doing this with Spetsnaz and/or chem weapons.

[RN7]

Originally Posted by Raellus

The T2K v1.0 history cites a fairly decisive battle in the Norwegian sea. My guess is that NATO was trying to support its land operations in northern Norway and/or Finland with naval air and ship/sub launched cruise missiles and the Soviets decided to sortie and hit them with the kitchen sink. The resulting multi-day battle resulted in the de facto destruction of both forces. If the Soviets could neutralize NATO's land-based air in Norway*, it could use it's land-based Backfire, Blackjack, and Fencer naval air fleet to launch ASMs at the approaching NATO naval task forces, while a sizable Red Fleet surface force, screened by subs and missile boats operating out of radar dead spots along Norway's coast, makes a foray into the Norwegian sea.

Another possible explanation is that NATO sent a large force to hit the Soviet anchorages on the Kola Peninsula and the Soviets were forced to throw everything into their defense. In terms of imagination fodder, I much prefer the former scenario.

*I imagine them doing this with Spetsnaz and/or chem weapons.

I'm surprised that T2K v1.0 history doesn't cite there being more than one battle in the Norwegian sea. Control of the Norwegian Sea was a fundamental naval priority of NATO and the Soviet Union, as although a general war such as the Twilight War would not be won in the Norwegian Sea it could easily be lost their.

Until the development of nuclear submarines and intercontinental ballistic missiles the Norwegian Sea and the northern polar region were of limited importance to all major powers. By the Twilight War period it had become highly important to the strategic interests of the United States, the Soviet Union and their allies. The dynamics of anti-submarine and ballistic missile technology had also led to a constantly evolving significance of the region.

When the Soviet first deployed ballistic missile submarines they had to reach launching positions in the western Atlantic to strike the continental United States. NATO stopped them in their tracks when they established the GIUK Gap. This forced to Soviets to develop longer ranged missiles which enabled them to fire from the Barents and Polar seas. By the late 1980's Soviet submarine launched intercontinental ballistic missiles were considered first strike capable, and 75% of their SSBN's could reach any target in the USA, Western Europe, Japan, and China from launching positions in Arctic waters, and in the case of the Typhoon and Delta IV from beneath ice packs. Although this lessened the importance of access to Atlantic waters for Soviet nuclear forces, controlling the Norwegian Sea remained highly important. To maintain the capability to launch a nuclear attack or counter strike on the USA the Soviet Navy had to protect these strategic assets by devoting a major part of its attack submarines, surface vessels, and aircraft to be used in an anti-submarine role. It also led to the development of several new types of attack submarines and cruise missiles to tackle increasingly more advanced US and NATO naval forces in the Norwegian Sea and Atlantic. The Soviets also had to defend their homeland through control of the Norwegian Sea, and in wartime it was necessary to be able to cut the sea-lanes of communication between North America and Europe and attack and destroy NATO forces.

For NATO it pushed its naval priorities beyond the GIUK Gap and into the Norwegian Sea and the Arctic. US and British nuclear submarines were now tasked with hunting Soviet SSBN's in northern waters and tackling improving Soviet attack submarines and anti-submarine defences. Changing US Navy naval strategy from the early 1980's based on the principals of deterrence, forward defence, and offensive warfare also proposed sending US carrier battle groups into the Norwegian Sea to strike at Soviet bases in the Kola Peninsula. This put further pressure on NATO to defend these expensive and irreplaceable assets, and meant that control of the Norwegian Sea was more important. Also if NATO lost control of the Norwegian Sea then Norway and probably Denmark would be lost too, allowing the Soviets to force the GIUK Gap and gain access to the Atlantic to cut sea lines of communications. Losing control in the Norwegian Sea makes it almost impossible for sufficient surveillance in this area, and would allow the Soviet Union access to Norwegian airfields from which they can operate bombers and fighters. If the Soviets also gained control of Iceland then almost any important part of Europe will be within range of Soviet bombers.

[Adm.Lee]

Originally Posted by RN7

I'm surprised that T2K v1.0 history doesn't cite there being more than one battle in the Norwegian sea. Control of the Norwegian Sea was a fundamental naval priority of NATO and the Soviet Union, as although a general war such as the Twilight War would not be won in the Norwegian Sea it could easily be lost their.

Given that the Soviets struck first in this theater, I suspect there was plenty of action, it just didn't get mentioned?

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by RN7

I'm surprised that T2K v1.0 history doesn't cite there being more than one battle in the Norwegian sea.

Me too. Perhaps the Battle of the Norwegian Sea was a series of linked battles, kind of like those surrounding the campaign for Guadalcanal, albeit covering a shorter period of time. More likely, it was a multi-day battle involving multiple task forces, a-la the Battle of Leyte Gulf.

[Webstral]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Me too. Perhaps the Battle of the Norwegian Sea was a series of linked battles, kind of like those surrounding the campaign for Guadalcanal, albeit covering a shorter period of time. More likely, it was a multi-day battle involving multiple task forces, a-la the Battle of Leyte Gulf.

I like the way The War That Never Was handles the fighting in the Norwegian Sea. The battle moves through high intensity and medium intensity phases without ever really pausing. I suspect that the naval battle has two distinct high intensity phases. The
first starts with the main clash in the North Atlantic between NATO and the Red Banner Northern Fleet. After NATO wins, the Allies follow the next logical step and pound the Soviet bases on the Kola Peninsula so that air power based on carriers and on land can focus on providing support for NATO forces counterattacking on the ground in Norway. The Soviets move the surviving aircraft and naval assets out while leaving a lot of wrecked hardware around to give NATO the impression that attacks on air bases are destroying a lot of combat platforms.

Once the Allies hit their stop line in Germany, they’d like to call it quits. The bulk of the surviving Atlantic Fleet assets retire for replenishment. During this period, the Soviets move back in and repair the runways and other facilities as best they can. They know NATO will be back. NATO does come back in June, and they get pasted.

[Adm.Lee]

I collected all of the Fleet series, but I think the one I never actually played was Sixth.

An idea for someday: put together enough groups that the games could be simultaneously played, perhaps with some OB modifications depending on team strategy.

For now, they all sit. I have 30-gallon plastic box that has nothing but WW3 games in it-- the Fleets, Air War (TSR/SPI), NATO (VG), Third World War series (GDW), Central Front series (SPI and 3W), and others.

[rcaf_777]

Their is a Hunt for the red October Board Game that I played in High School, I liked it quite a lot

[Anna Elizabeth]

I used to love GDW's Harpoon, I still have Harpoon 4.1 and the High Tide box set that covers the Cold War with declassified Soviet weapons. Did you know that the USSR had a 100 knot Nuclear-tipped torpedo?

I'm wondering lately whether CVNs are pretty much the modern version of BBs in 1941? I've heard so many stories and rumors of diesel submarines getting perfect killshot opportunities, and the US Navy seems to have drawn down their surface ASW capabilities.