Jump to content

RETAC21

Members
  • Posts

    12,203
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by RETAC21

  1. What Seahawk said is correct, losing Malta but keeping Sicily has the same effect in cross-Med traffic. The one effect Malta had on supply convoys to Malta was to distract Axis air power and to create a bubble that restricted Italian naval power somewhat. Further, the Sicilian narrows were heavily mined, so it involved a level of risk even with no air/submarine attacks.
  2. The difference is I am using official USN sources. There's more evidence out there, but the people putting it out may be violating their NDAs. Glenn is looking stuff in Google if anything... just look at the non-sensical idea of putting ASMs on fishing boats.
  3. Sez Glenn because Glenn knows what Google assumes. The only question is how much more non-sense can you spout in order to try to cut back the odds to what you want to play in Risk. What happened to the fishing boats with SSMs? they can also track and sink CVNs?
  4. RETAC21

    AT&T down

    AT&T says service has been restored after massive, nationwide outage. Authorities are investigating https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/22/tech/att-cell-service-outage/index.html
  5. More and more non-sense. Look the order in which missions are delineated for US submarines: https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/2169558/attack-submarines-ssn/ Attack submarines are designed to 1) seek and destroy enemy submarines and surface ships; 2) project power ashore with Tomahawk cruise missiles and Special Operation Forces (SOF); 3) carry out Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) missions; 4) support battle group operations; 5) and engage in mine warfare. Doubt it? let's look at an example (all open source, of course): February 21, 1976 , USS OMAHA (SSN 692) was launched by the Electric Boat Division of General Dynamics Corp., Groton, CT. In late April 1978, she was reassigned to Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, effective as of 1 May. On 22 July 1979, Omaha stood out from Pearl Harbor for deployment to the Eastern Pacific (EastPac). During the year, the submarine also completed NavSea acoustic trials, two major anti-submarine warfare (ASW) exercises, two special operations, and several local operations. In early 1980, ...She set off for the western Pacific (WestPac) in May, arriving on station on 6 June. She completed special operations for Commander Submarine Force, U.S. Pacific Fleet (ComSubPac) through the first week of July On 16 August, Omaha conducted a surveillance operation in the Philippine Sea and then proceeded to the Indian Ocean, where she operated for the next two months. Omaha departed for another relatively short WestPac deployment early in June 1981, inchopping to the Seventh Fleet on the 8th. The ship conducted special operations for ComSubPac, then put in to Subic Bay for upkeep (28 July–1 August). In May 1991, Omaha departed for a seven week deployment to the northern Pacific, conducting operations for ComSubPac. The ship completed sea trials and concluded her SRA at the end of February 1992 and commenced operations in local waters. In March, the submarine exercised with Pintado (SSN-672) and Birmingham (SSN-695). The boat participated in the major multi-national fleet exercise RimPac 92 in June and achieved her pre-overseas movement certification in July. Omaha departed on a six month WestPac deployment in August 1992. During her transit of the Pacific, the submarine took part in battle group support exercises. Later in the month, she conducted a search and rescue exercise and touched at Sasebo, Japan. In November, the boat called at Yokosuka and then headed to Australia to take part in Exercise Lungfish 92 with the Australian submarines HMAS Otway (S.59) and HMAS Ovens (S.70). Omaha was placed in commission in reserve on 7 February 1995, decommissioned and stricken from the Naval Vessel Register on 5 October 1995. Sooo, Omaha only once operated in concert with a battle group during her commissioning and then only in transit. So Googel ASSumes too much. Just like you. As for the fishing boats, put on your glasses and stop your fantasies, the only drone you can fly out of them is an FPV and ships will shrug them off without even noticing. Yet more of your bizarre fantasies of a Chinese-Russian empire.
  6. You keep making shit up to shore up your fantasy. The notion of fishing boats with killer drone is ridiculous (mainly because the boats are not large enough to hide a proper killer drone) and US carriers do not have a SSN escort usually (you read too many novels)
  7. Is not "our" trade, it's trade in general. As you can see in the list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Red_Sea_crisis There are ships from all kind of owners with cargo going to just about anywhere in the region, including Iran and Yemen (!)
  8. 1) You are out of touch with the reality of the World. The PRC tried to build that network through the String of Pearls and the Road and Belt initiative. Didn't work out, because they found out that 3rd world nations are 3rd world for reasons that apply to them too, not just the evil white men, so they have thrown billions to get a pier in Djibouti and little else. With their economy in the tank, these fantasies stopped years ago. 2) No, I am definitely not. You just don't know what you are talking about, quelle surprise... Long range aviation no longer exists, it was merged in the VKS years ago. The mighty Russian submarines in the Pacific amount to... 4 SSNs built between 1989 and 1992, of which one is in "reserve", 7 SSGN of which 3 in "reserve" giving you an operational fleet of 7 vs 25 SSNs and 3 SSGN for the US PACFLT. 3) You don't think a lot of things, and this is one of them. just how the Chinese would be able to track and destroy these tenders? with their meager fleet of 6 SSNs, of which 2 are so noisy they are practically useless? 4) There's no "NATO" in the Pacific and submarines don't do convoy work, now or in the past. 5) No, I'd suggest you read a bit. The way the U boats were defeated was by sinking them, to the point that the German submarine service was the branch of the German armed forces in which you were most likely to die in the line of duty.
  9. No, what is amusing is that you are trying to backpedal your non-sense by inferring something that you were unable to spell out, and this is a game that 2 can play, kid: Russia is part of Europe, which makes it an intra-european conflict if anything, nothing to do with Iran. Also it's not "Iranian" drones, but drones that Russia bought from Iran. Or are you also worried that Chinese drones are flying over Europe? Mebbe you can try to grow up?
  10. Why bother with Indonesia? just base them in N. Australia and Mexico!
  11. A wall of text, a wall of non-sense. 1) this Sino-Russian thing is a construct you have created out of thin air. The Chinese are keeping their distance from the Russians, and the Russians don't bring anything to the table that would change the equation for the Chinese. 2) Logistic support networks for SSNs comprise food and... food. Maybe some torpedoes, and the occasional spare part. The USN has this things called Submarine tenders that enable support form any suitable bay in, I don't know, New Guinea, Australia, Christmas island... 3) The notion that "The ports have to be close to blockade positions" is also absurd, more so with 50+ SSNs to cover what, 6 straits?, maybe less. That, without counting surface ships, of course, that can also do this. 4) container ships and whatever. Your notion that ships will go on shipping if they are being sunk, which is what would happen to blockade runners, is also ridiculous. If that were so, Germany wouldn't have lost WW1 and there would still be a Confederate States of America.
  12. Glenn recanting, oh, what a marvelous time we live in... US/AU SSN must return to what port? when? how do you know that if you don't track them. But Roman has already shot down the rest of your non-sense, so no need to bother. It's like you strange idea that merchant ships are going to sail into a declared exclusion zone just like that.
  13. Apologies, didn't realize that the military part of your training overwhelmed the intelligence part. Did you miss the part where we are discussing NATO and that Ukraine is not part of it? I have highlighted it because you seem to have trouble following what we are discussing here, but if you are still unable to follow it, I can have it spelled letter by letter.
  14. Bleh, got lazy looking for the Falklands thread so I will drop this here: https://www.argentina.gob.ar/sites/default/files/2023/10/the-argentine-air-force-during-malvinas-war_ch0-2.pdf First 2 chapters of the Argentinian Air Force official history of the Malvinas war. Has an interesting take on the preliminaries of the war.
  15. At the end of the day, there's just no way for the Axis to overcome Allied logistics in North Africa. The war should have been shorter there but for British failures.
  16. Mebbe, but at the end of the day, they are putting steel at sea and aluminium in the air. Got to give it to them, they are developing quite an industry.
  17. While at it, Turkiye is still in NATO, and they want a 60k Carrier (QE for comparison): Length: 285m (284m) Beam: 69m (73m) Draught: 10.1m (11m) Displacement: 60.000 tonnes (65.000 tonnes) Speed: 25 knots (+25 knots) Propulsion: COGAG (CODAG) STOBAR Presumably, the aircraft would be a naval version of TAI Kaan
  18. This was posted before, but it gives a fair idea of the logistic issues: https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/article/north-african-campaign-wwiis-ultimate-war-of-logistics/ While most of the supplies got through and nearly all personnel made it to Africa, at times the losses were quite sharp and had an impact on the ebb and flow of the battlefield. Not only that, it distracted the Luftwaffe from other tasks, as Malta needed to be suppressed from time to time.
  19. I also believe a 2 state solution for Israel is the way out of the Palestinian problem, there being plenty of evidence to support that and it's a completely unreal proposition for the foreseeable future. Don't confuse your whishes with reality. Re Ukraine is not part of NATO, and not part of the "Europe" we are discussing here, so no, Iranian drones are not flying routinely over Europe, I thought the context of the discussion was clear enough, but it seems it needs to be spelled to you.
  20. No, it isn't, if they were doing their best, there would be no shipping going through Bab El Mandeb, and if they got really serious about it, Hormuz would also be a no-go zone. They wouldn't use drones, they would use sea mines and that would be that, given the paucity of means in the area. What you are seeing is just harassment because Iranians love to stir shit up and the Houthis North Yemenis are like the Comanches of old that love a good ole raid here and there, specially if paid for by Iranians.
  21. 1) Is not and won't be, thought that was clear enough. 2) Yes, again with full commitment from all members. This is something that hasn't happened in Ukraine, which was fed the leftovers of the Cold War. Same with industrial mobilisation, there's none in practical terms. 3) No, they are not and the Iranians have no reason to target Europe, when Europe is more than willing to do business with them, but for those pesky US sanctions. A Europe that becomes a independent military power is not something that other will like much. It's not going to be World Police, it's not going to have qualms about reaching agreements with unsavory regimes that could be good clients, it's not going to see Africa as anything but a playground for the French and it will lower the threshold of nuclear weapons use if Russia comes knocking around. Once the first tactical nuke goes off and the World doesn't end, we are going to be in a very different World, and not a better one.
  22. This is precisely what NATO is not. It is not and never was intended as World Police, and it had very specific geographical limits because it was conceived as a defensive alliance vs Russia, ie, just what is needed now. Individually, no European country could cope with Russia, but as a collective, it's much more than Russia could bite, assuming everyone complies with the existing, agreed commitments, even without the US. I would like to know how Iran is going to invade Europe...
  23. Yes, and Russia conquered Ukraine already according to Glennworld. Real World being different, begs the question of how the blockaded country is tracking these SSNs which currently it cannot track, just for starters.
  24. Obviously not, and it doesn't reflect US policy, but Australian one. Not everyone is as clueless as you, Glenn.
  25. The Battle of the Irpin river in 2022 https://issuu.com/chacr_camberley/docs/wip_-_bar_special?fr=xKAE9_zU1NQ
×
×
  • Create New...