Thread: Current Naval Power

Originally Posted by Dreadnought

From the very same Cruisebook the ships she sailed with at one point or another during that time period.

USS Enterprise (CVAN 65) WestPac Cruise Book 1971-72 - WestPac Cruise

Basicly an entire navy, looks like there is even two guided misile cruisers , even thou in in 1971 they were not called this way.

Originally Posted by 1979

Basicly an entire navy, looks like there is even two guided misile cruisers , even thou in in 1971 they were not called this way.

You could say alot of firepower both gun and missle. This does not count the CV's own defenses outside of her airwings and CAP. You will also notice that no submarines are listed just the surface combatants. The CAP and all surface combatants will ensure that nothing gets near the CV for miles. However nothing is perfect but a better defense than anybody could put to wing in those days.

Originally Posted by ace009

$5 billion for a Nimitz class carrier? Wow - WTF is IN doing spending almost $2 billion for the damn Gorshkov?
I have another question - if India can build a nuclear submarine in 2011, how long SHOULD it take them to build a nuclear carrier?
PRC built it's first nuclear submarine in 1981 IIRC, they still have not got a nuclear carrier. They might get one in another 10 years (2021). So, for India will it be another 40 years or so?

Im guessing here but it will depend upon if they decide they even need a CVN for their Naval Doctrine. It may not suite them or their needs. India atleast has invested though in their own program so they "should" be able to turn one out at a reasonable cost (gas turbine powered or boiler) after these two go to sea. Then it would depend on how much they are willing to spend and invest time for a nuclear project and the facilities to service it. If not then maybe invest in reasearch to overcome the fossile fuel barrier and like the USN maybe look more towards "green" fuels.

Originally Posted by Dreadnought

Im guessing here but it will depend upon if they decide they even need a CVN for their Naval Doctrine. It may not suite them or their needs. India atleast has invested though in their own program so they "should" be able to turn one out at a reasonable cost (gas turbine powered or boiler) after these two go to sea. Then it would depend on how much they are willing to spend and invest time for a nuclear project and the facilities to service it. If not then maybe invest in reasearch to overcome the fossile fuel barrier and like the USN maybe look more towards "green" fuels.

Sign on for a Queen Liz class.

They'd get more.

Originally Posted by Dreadnought

....
To give you an idea of their "toughness"

USS America CVA-66

...
According to the December 4, 2006 issue of "Navy Times," ex-America was in one piece and sitting on its keel, some 476 miles east of Charleston, SC, and about 400 miles west of Bermuda, and 16,860 feet (5,139 meters) below the surface. This information was obtained by the USS America Carrier Veterans Association on October 30, through a Freedom of Information Act request.

Even their armor scheme was listed as "unknown" although there are many that "volunteered" numbers but nothing ever confirmed. And she was struck with weapons that were decades newer then her own design and protection.

Reading between the lines there's probably a reason they sunk her over 5 km's beneath the surface...

Originally Posted by Chunder

Sign on for a Queen Liz class.

They'd get more.

Biggest problem with that is she's bigger then what they are building currently and more then likely would have to return to a British yard when it comes time for refit or upgrade.

IMO, Better to be self sufficient and invest in your countries navy it will create jobs, promote indigenous tech growth and infastructure. Thats how world powers are made in the Naval world and it would benefit the Indian people overall instead of foreigners.

Originally Posted by Gun Grape

Didn't say the French would be able to pull it off. Just that if any European Navy could, it would be the French.

Okay, but still how? Their current force structure do not give any iota of confidence for doing so.

Originally Posted by kato

"Amounts of money spent" had nothing to do with the number of deployed soldiers. The whole war was financed by Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Japan, Germany and the UAE (in that order). Neither France nor the UK nor the US paid any significant sums (US roughly on par with the UAE), they just provided the warm bodies so to say.

and the billions upon billions of dollars of military might.. those tanks, trucks, cruise missiles, guns and warships don't come cheap...

as far as France being a global power, they definitely CAN be, if they choose to be since they do have a VERY advanced Navy, aka, nuclear powered carriers, submarines (both SSN's and SSBN's) advanced destroyers etc... how their Army and Marines are I don't know.. but I'd assume they are on the same level as their Navy.

Originally Posted by Deltacamelately

Okay, but still how? Their current force structure do not give any iota of confidence for doing so.

A more interesting question would be: Could the EU as a whole do it? I.e. field an expeditionary force into the theater capable of defeating a defending force and subsequently being able to successfully defend a gained territory?

Looking over the layout of European naval forces, that would mean a carrier group leading the initial assault (Charles de Gaulle), with a sea control group centered around a second (light) carrier fielded persistently over a longer period. Amphibious capacity in the initial assault would soar to around fifteen capital units including three helo carriers; would give reasonable capacity to field at least 7,500, possibly up to 10,000 ground forces in the initial assault, with MCCE providing rapid capacity (50 ships on call) to shuttle in and supply a full 60,000-man Corps once harbours in-theater are secured in the initial assault.

For escort of this probably somewhere around 50-60 frigates and destroyers could be fielded, for supply about 12-15 larger replenishment ships and tankers (which i admit is a bit low).

Provided at least some airfields in the area could be taken intact it wouldn't be too difficult to post a few fighter squadrons to the area afterwards. Just run them out of La Reunion etc with AAR, possibly also clandestinely from some semi-allied countries (like Singapore). There are plenty of smaller air strips in the islands capable of fielding at least Rafales and Eurofighters for STOL interception QRAs.

Once that's done i doubt the Indian military would be able to dislodge them again. At least without nukes.

That would mean all of the EU soldiers should be fluent in French besides other characteristics

Back when i served French was mandatory to get a post on Eurocorps. *shrug*

Originally Posted by kato

A more interesting question would be: Could the EU as a whole do it? I.e. field an expeditionary force into the theater capable of defeating a defending force and subsequently being able to successfully defend a gained territory?

Looking over the layout of European naval forces, that would mean a carrier group leading the initial assault (Charles de Gaulle), with a sea control group centered around a second (light) carrier fielded persistently over a longer period. Amphibious capacity in the initial assault would soar to around fifteen capital units including three helo carriers; would give reasonable capacity to field at least 7,500, possibly up to 10,000 ground forces in the initial assault, with MCCE providing rapid capacity (50 ships on call) to shuttle in and supply a full 60,000-man Corps once harbours in-theater are secured in the initial assault.

For escort of this probably somewhere around 50-60 frigates and destroyers could be fielded, for supply about 12-15 larger replenishment ships and tankers (which i admit is a bit low).

Provided at least some airfields in the area could be taken intact it wouldn't be too difficult to post a few fighter squadrons to the area afterwards. Just run them out of La Reunion etc with AAR, possibly also clandestinely from some semi-allied countries (like Singapore). There are plenty of smaller air strips in the islands capable of fielding at least Rafales and Eurofighters for STOL interception QRAs.

Once that's done i doubt the Indian military would be able to dislodge them again. At least without nukes.

EU might have the equipment to do it, but does it have the command structure to do it?

Imagine the havoc with all the commanders speaking French.

If it's not to be English I'd vote for German to be official commanding language everywhere. Even in structures Germany doesn't participate in

No offense here guys but I would also like to see where those 50-60 "Euro" Frigates are coming from. And IMO, no doubt 15 resupply ships would be inadequate.

Is also going to ask, which of any of those "Euros" wants to foot the bill? Is not going to be cheap considering outside of one carrier at present all the rest are burning fossile fuel and consuming xxxxx gallons of lube oil and have top be resupplyed in so many days. Were not even talking food, parts or consumables here. And any battle group is only as fast at sea as what its slowest ships are.....the resupply ships and tankers.

Ubber logistics........Ubber "Euros"