N4SDChastity
Posts: 327
Joined: 2/27/2006 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: kdsub I don't intend to find them...but to make reaction time to an attack to be a few hours instead of days. That is the idea of spreading light attack carriers in a pattern. If a watchful crew makes an sos call at the first site I think a good portion of the time a response could counter a lot of attacks. One attack helicopter could play havoc with pirate crews. Rather than watch a million miles of ocean just watch and keep tabs on the location of passing ships. After awhile and a few shot up pirate boats and crews I think the attacks will be greatly reduced if not stopped… Especially if a few Special Forces follow them home and say hello. I don’t know you or if you are a warrior and it is not important anyway… I just wanted to know if you had some knowledge that allowed you to properly evaluate my suggestion… I see that you don’t. If you had I would have like to hear your educated ideas. I do understand what you are saying about the vast area… but I think it is manageable with the proper commitment. Butch You don't need 2 years of war college to know that, while your concept does hold water (again, pun intended) I do not think it is the most practical. Yes, cutting down reaction time would allow you time on target sooner, you are expending a vast amount of resources, again, trying to cover an even more vast area. CBG's (Carrier Battle Groups - the dozen-ish ships that are tasked with hanging around with the actual Carriers) are not easy or cheap to feed and fuel for ANY amount of time afloat. The CAP (Combat Air Patrol - constant fighter-jets in the air, 24/7, patrolling the perimeter, plus about 125miles in every direction) and AWACS (google it) can pretty much keep track of several hundred square miles of ocean and EVERYTHING flying or floating in that circle. But, then what? Arbitrarily board and/or sink every non-aligned vessel we encounter? Impractical, mostly for political reasons (war is, after all, politics by other means... See, I've read some of the same books they use IN war college, for free, at my public library.). But, again, it takes a lot of fuel and manpower, and food, and sleepless watches to KEEP CAP and AWACS up and on station continously. And, while they are stuck doing THAT, WHO is going to watch whatever prolem area they were originally watching? 2-3 carriers, you say? They do NOT travel alone. You're talking maybe 50+ ships, pulled from somewhere else, to steam to one point in the ocean, just to hunt pirates. It would take weeks to get them ALL there. Weeks more to coordinate their efforts. And, if *I* were a Somali Pirate, I would simply pull in my crews and go littoral (means hanging close to shore), until the big, bad Americans run out of money and the voters get fed up with paying for a head-hunt that will gain them (the voters) NOTHING! You want me to continue extrapolating WHY your idea is a bad one? I could get granular in my analysis, if it would make my point better, but I doubt you are prepared to listen to that degree. And, I didn't even get into the manpower required, shipside, to launch and retrieve the amount of aircraft you suggest. Choppers, if I remember correctly. Lets diverge into that, briefly. It takes a stupendous amount of fuel to keep a helo airborne. Their functional range ain't that great. Plus, top speed, even for the attack choppers is limited by the laws of physics to about 240 mph, or so. Top speed burns fuel about 3-5X faster than cruise velocities. Figure maybe 3 hours flight-time, less if they have to be vectored to point y from point z in a hurry. Maintenance, weapons loading and unloading, refueling... Yes, your ideal could work. Feel better? Vindicated? [Mod Note: personal attacks removed]
< Message edited by ModeratorEleven -- 4/16/2009 9:04:11 PM >
|