US 2nd Fleet Questions

[kalos72]

If you were to include a Marine unit:

22nd MEU (MAGTF/CE), deployed as Landing Force 6th Fleet (LF6F)
1) BLT 3/8 (GCE)
a) 3rd Battalion, 8th Marine Regiment : 1103 men
b) Artillery Battery: 4 M198, 4 M101A1
c) Tank Platoon: 5 M60A1
d) Amphibious Assault Vehicle Platoon: 12 AAV
e) Reconnaissance Platoon
f) Combat Engineer Platoon
2) HMM-162(Composite) (ACE)
a) HMM-162 “Golden Eagles”: 12 CH-46E
b) det HMLA-269: 4 AH-1T, 3 UH-1N
c) det HMH-464: 4 CH-53E

Carried on the Wasp Expeditionary Strike Group
USS Wasp (LHD 1)
USS Shreveport (LPD-12)
USS Whidbey Island (LSD 41)
USS Yorktown (CG-48)
USS Leyte Gulf (CG-55)
USS Newport News (SSN 750) - Not sure if this is correct
USS McFaul (DDG-74)

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by kalos72

If you were to include a Marine unit:

22nd MEU (MAGTF/CE), deployed as Landing Force 6th Fleet (LF6F)
1) BLT 3/8 (GCE)
a) 3rd Battalion, 8th Marine Regiment : 1103 men
b) Artillery Battery: 4 M198, 4 M101A1
c) Tank Platoon: 5 M60A1
d) Amphibious Assault Vehicle Platoon: 12 AAV
e) Reconnaissance Platoon
f) Combat Engineer Platoon
2) HMM-162(Composite) (ACE)
a) HMM-162 “Golden Eagles”: 12 CH-46E
b) det HMLA-269: 4 AH-1T, 3 UH-1N
c) det HMH-464: 4 CH-53E

Carried on the Wasp Expeditionary Strike Group
USS Wasp (LHD 1)
USS Shreveport (LPD-12)
USS Whidbey Island (LSD 41)
USS Yorktown (CG-48)
USS Leyte Gulf (CG-55)
USS Newport News (SSN 750) - Not sure if this is correct
USS McFaul (DDG-74)

The only two possible problems are;

The USS Wasp, IMHO it would be more likely for a Tarawa-class or even an Iwo Jima-class LPH to be committed, especially with the lack of Harriers in your air group.

The Aegis ruisers would most likely be with one of the carrier battle groups, if a missile cruiser would be assigned, it would be one of the older ones If not a missile destroyer or two.

Why? The newest cruisers tended to be assigned to carrier battle groups or independent surface action groups, even the SAGs based on battleships made do with a missile destroyer for the AAW slot. At the very least it would be one of the older missile cruiser classes. The Navy tended to place it's more modern and powerful ships to its high priority targets, like the carriers.

[Cdnwolf]

I managed to get my hands on some of the later editions of Harpoon books and would love to run a naval battle using the TWL2000 timeline. See really how well a CV Battle Group stands up to a nuclear strike at sea.

[kalos72]

Were the ESG's not around in the 90'? Wikipedia seems to say that the ESG's were designed to be like a smaller CV Group. Give some presence but not as much as the CV Groups.

For something like securing the PCZ, I think it would be size appropriate.

[dragoon500ly]

The Wasp-class was intended to smaller and cheaper copies of the Tarawa-class LPH, needless to say, the Wasps ended up being the largest amphibious ships in the world.

Major differences between the classes are the Wasp has:
1. Increases Harrier support capability.
2. Movement of the stern elevator to the starboard side of the flight deck.
3. Redesign of the docking well to support 3 LCACs.
4. Less vehicle storage space, 22,000 square feet vs. 33,000 square feet.
5. Less bulk cargo storage space, 101,000 cubic feet vs. 110,000 square feet.
6. Modification for better anti-aircraft defence.
7. Extensive medical facilities, double in size with six operating rooms and room for 600 bed patients.

The Wasp is designed to support MAF/MAB operations. The Wasp will be better as to support VTOL operations in spite of its lack of a ski jump, her larger flight deck is considered sufficiently large enough to operate rolling takeoffs for heavily laden aircraft.

The stern docking well of a Wasp-class can accommodate 3 LCAC or 4 LCU or 2 LCU and 3 LCM-8s or 17 LCM-6s or 45 LVTP-7. In addition 34 LVTP-7s can be carried on the third deck.

The Wasps are intended to replace the Tarawas starting with the commissioning of the sixth ship in mid-1996.

[kalos72]

I am good with moving some of the ships to a previous/older class, that makes sense, but does the size/strength of the unit make sense as well?

[dragoon500ly]

I think so, just to be a tad more realistic...add a couple of freighters to carry the NGs and their gear. Perhaps add several LCVPs and LCMs as deck cargo.

Another possible is to add either the British or Dutch Caribbean Station warship with a company of Royal Marines or Dutch Marines, I do know that both countries do exercise with US Marines on a regular basis, there is even a photo in Armies of NATO`s Central Front showing Dutch and US Marines on a joint exercise.

Just a few more random thoughts.....