StarDestroyer.Net BBS

For some reason George W. and Tony have a falling out, and war breaks out between the two countries. A CVBG with two late-model Nimitz class carriers, full strength air-groups and associated escort vessels are within striking distance of the British Isles. What happens?

kheegan wrote:For some reason George W. and Tony have a falling out, and war breaks out between the two countries. A CVBG with two late-model Nimitz class carriers, full strength air-groups and associated escort vessels are within striking distance of the British Isles. What happens?

Is there some law that states that every forum and NG on the planet must ask the same unanswerable, pointless question?

The carriers reduce the RN surface force to drifting debris, destroy much of the RAF and burn much of the UK's oil supplies hit a few other key targets like power stations. Only under seas do the British really have a chance, its quite possibul a T boat could take down one of the CVN's or at least an escort or two. However the carriers have quite strong ASW protection and at least four 688i's along with them. It's more likely the RN will see no victories.

UK ground forces and basic infrastructure such as bridges will be mostly untouched by the time the carriers must withdraw for lack of ordinance. Though the US can lift enough troops to defeat them. Invading the country would be a more difficult proposition. But grabbing part of Scotland, bringing in a heavy corps and a few hundred tactical aircraft could happen.

Sea Skimmer wrote:The carriers reduce the RN surface force to drifting debris, destroy much of the RAF and burn much of the UK's oil supplies hit a few other key targets like power stations. Only under seas do the British really have a chance, its quite possibul a T boat could take down one of the CVN's or at least an escort or two. However the carriers have quite strong ASW protection and at least four 688i's along with them. It's more likely the RN will see no victories.

Actually the subs sink the Fleet as they do in nearly every exercise. The point is mute though as it will NEVER happen. What motivates people to ask this question? It's the same stupid question that leads to the same answer every time it's asked, on every forum and Ng it's asked on. It'll never happen and there's no way of knowing anyway.

And you don't want to destroy our Oil refineries, as we supply you with huge amounts of refined oil.

Pointless, as I'm sure that Great Britain would employ nuclear weapons in the final defense of her homeland. Even if the retaliatory strikes from the US turn the entire island into a glassed-over parking lot, the UK could inflict too much suffering on the United States to make the venture worthwile.

Rob Wilson wrote:

Sea Skimmer wrote:The carriers reduce the RN surface force to drifting debris, destroy much of the RAF and burn much of the UK's oil supplies hit a few other key targets like power stations. Only under seas do the British really have a chance, its quite possibul a T boat could take down one of the CVN's or at least an escort or two. However the carriers have quite strong ASW protection and at least four 688i's along with them. It's more likely the RN will see no victories.

Actually the subs sink the Fleet as they do in nearly every exercise. The point is mute though as it will NEVER happen. What motivates people to ask this question? It's the same stupid question that leads to the same answer every time it's asked, on every forum and Ng it's asked on. It'll never happen and there's no way of knowing anyway.

And you don't want to destroy our Oil refineries, as we supply you with huge amounts of refined oil.

Exercises always limit the carriers to relatively small areas of sea in which they basically circle endlessly. That lets the SSN's go quite and wait. In a real operation the carriers will not be so cooperative as to give the British a defined area in which they will remain.

This is also why 8 knot SSK's catch 18 knot carrier groups. In reaility there little better the mobile mine fields.

Sea Skimmer wrote:

Rob Wilson wrote: Actually the subs sink the Fleet as they do in nearly every exercise. The point is mute though as it will NEVER happen. What motivates people to ask this question? It's the same stupid question that leads to the same answer every time it's asked, on every forum and Ng it's asked on. It'll never happen and there's no way of knowing anyway.

Exercises always limit the carriers to relatively small areas of sea in which they basically circle endlessly. That lets the SSN's go quite and wait. In a real operation the carriers will not be so cooperative as to give the British a defined area in which they will remain.

This is also why 8 knot SSK's catch 18 knot carrier groups. In reaility there little better the mobile mine fields.

Yes, but you are coming to us and we can see the routes your taking, so again we can lay in wait in the right area with just small movements to adjust to intercept. All that speed also hinders your ASW efforts. It's swings and roundabouts and it still doesn't matter because it'll never happen.

Rob Wilson wrote:

Sea Skimmer wrote:

Rob Wilson wrote: Actually the subs sink the Fleet as they do in nearly every exercise. The point is mute though as it will NEVER happen. What motivates people to ask this question? It's the same stupid question that leads to the same answer every time it's asked, on every forum and Ng it's asked on. It'll never happen and there's no way of knowing anyway.

Exercises always limit the carriers to relatively small areas of sea in which they basically circle endlessly. That lets the SSN's go quite and wait. In a real operation the carriers will not be so cooperative as to give the British a defined area in which they will remain.

This is also why 8 knot SSK's catch 18 knot carrier groups. In reaility there little better the mobile mine fields.

Yes, but you are coming to us and we can see the routes your taking, so again we can lay in wait in the right area with just small movements to adjust to intercept. All that speed also hinders your ASW efforts. It's swings and roundabouts and it still doesn't matter because it'll never happen.

The two or three available subs can't come close to covering all approaches.

And would you please shut up about the "it will never happen" crap. THIS WHOLE FUCKING BOARD IS ABOUT A CROSS OVER THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN WITH CIVILIZATIONS THAT ARE NOT EVEN REAL

Sea Skimmer wrote:[
And would you please shut up about the "it will never happen" crap. THIS WHOLE FUCKING BOARD IS ABOUT A CROSS OVER THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN WITH CIVILIZATIONS THAT ARE NOT EVEN REAL

And yet is still more likely than this situation.

Hmm...going nuclear would be a truly huge step wouldn't it, considering that UK only has strategic weapons?

The only nukes that the Brits have are Tridents on the V-boats.

The best response I've ever heard to such a scenario was that the USN and RN head down to the Carribbean and have a beach party while the politicians fume.

phongn wrote:The best response I've ever heard to such a scenario was that the USN and RN head down to the Carribbean and have a beach party while the politicians fume.

So true, though while the CVBG is sailing to the UK, the CDN SSK's could sorta wait then 'Poon and torp the CVBG if they went to the UK.

The CVBG could slaughter the entire surface RN, but the RN submarine force would gut the CVBG.

Anybody have any idea what the capabilities of the Seawolf Class Subs for the US are? I've heard they can do 48 knots...

Exonerate wrote:Anybody have any idea what the capabilities of the Seawolf Class Subs for the US are? I've heard they can do 48 knots...

Probably, but at that speed subs in the next ocean over will be able to hear them.

weemadando wrote: Probably, but at that speed subs in the next ocean over will be able to hear them.

IIRC, they have silent speeds of 20+ knots.....why do we think we
spent so damn much money on them?

MKSheppard wrote:

weemadando wrote: Probably, but at that speed subs in the next ocean over will be able to hear them.

IIRC, they have silent speeds of 20+ knots.....why do we think we
spent so damn much money on them?

Is that the same reasons so much money is spent on other things that arent any good?

Keevan_Colton wrote: Is that the same reasons so much money is spent on other things that arent any good?

V-22 is political pork. the Funding flows into 42+ states. No way in hell is
it going to be cancelled, no matter what.

True, it does show....just 'cause it costs a lot doesnt mean its going to kick ass.

Keevan_Colton wrote:True, it does show....just 'cause it costs a lot doesnt mean its going to kick ass.

Submarines and ships are expensive no matter what. I believe the
going rate for a DDG is about $700 million or higher.

The Navy doesn't spread it's shipbuilding out all over the USA, only
a few states have shipbuilding industries, so political pork is much
reduced, compared to the Air Force and the Army...

Ted wrote:

phongn wrote:The best response I've ever heard to such a scenario was that the USN and RN head down to the Carribbean and have a beach party while the politicians fume.

So true, though while the CVBG is sailing to the UK, the CDN SSK's could sorta wait then 'Poon and torp the CVBG if they went to the UK.

SSKs are almost useless against CVBGs, especially when they're in transit (ie +20kt). Yes, they score kills in wargames, but said CVs are forced into grid squares and unable to maneuver.

MKSheppard wrote:

Keevan_Colton wrote:True, it does show....just 'cause it costs a lot doesnt mean its going to kick ass.

Submarines and ships are expensive no matter what. I believe the
going rate for a DDG is about $700 million or higher.

The Navy doesn't spread it's shipbuilding out all over the USA, only
a few states have shipbuilding industries, so political pork is much
reduced, compared to the Air Force and the Army...

There are only five or six yards now that can build major warships, and only three generally have ships building. Ingalls, New Port News and Bath Iron Works. However they get materials and components from about twenty other states.

As it is the Navy needs to build twice as many ships as it is to keep the numbers up. So Congress can throw around billions in shipbuilding funds and not be wasting it. Though if they keep buying more Wasp's it will reach that point. At the rate things are going by 2020 we could have ARG's with two of them and a single LPD-17