Re: GZG FH: Blue water navy.

tom.anderson@altavista.net spake thusly upon matters weighty: 

 Brown water craft will likely abound, but 
> the blue water stuff is primarily there for maintaining or cutting 
> SLOCs (Sea Lines Of Communication) which won't be likely to have the 
> exaggerated prominence that they do,

Not entirely true. You'll still need ships for piracy suppression, 
customs control, etc. (and to ram the occaisional eco-terrorist 
vessel). The oceans will probably be inhabited. Therefore policing 
them effectively (and they'll be harder to police than land) will 
require effective military force - now, we aren't talking USS 
Enterprise and New Jersey, but we are talking frigates and such armed 
and armoured to withstand stand up fights with airborne, sea or land 
threats (and an extension of their missile and gunbattery capability 
may give them limited low orbit engagement). The Navy serves many 
non-wartime functions which will be more necessary than ever, but the 
use of smaller, faster, high-performance, high-capability vessels 
will be the norm (with grav recce/ASW vehicles instead of choppers). 

 for instance, in the case of the 
> United Kingdom or the United States (one being an island and hence 
> forced to have a navy or be restricted to invading Scotland yet again 
> and the other having oceans between itself and any enemies, unless of 
> course Canada is taken over by Nazis)

Or Americans.... far more likely.... and far less horrible... to most 
sane folk.... 

> John M. Atkinson

> anyway; i'm not sure that ocean-going ships will wane in
>  importance - global trade depends utterly on ships to
>  move billions of tonnes of freight each year. i don't
>  see many technologies on the horizon which seriously
>  threaten this. thus, ocean communications are still
>  vital.

Unless grav and power get way cheap, then every tank would be a grav 
tank and every infantry man would have a grav belt. 

 however, i do not think that wet navies will
>  have much use; by then, shore-based aircraft and recon
>  satellites will control the seas.

Do you plan on taking your shore based aircraft out in 10m waves to 
try to land your inspection teams on a suspect ship? No. You still 
need to have your frigate pull alongside and board. 
 
> possible alternatives to ships:
> 
> - a huuuge rail network, massive-gauge and
>  computer-controlled, shipping cargo at great speed.
>  possibly subterranean, as in those dodgy 80s gene
>  roddenbery post-apocalypse movies with 'subshuttles'.

Not necessarily alternative, could be an adjunct
 
> - airships. studies have been done of a cargo airship a
>  mile long with 35 000 tonnes cargo capacity, comparable
>  to modern freighters. some way to go before they can
>  rival the 564 763 deadweight tonne jahre viking
>  supertanker which plies our oceans.

Same comment
 
Beanstalks too. Cheapest ground to orbit cargo transport. 

> 
> and remember, the UN is there to stop all conflict in in core systems,
which includes earth.

United Nations Nautical Enforcement Arm (UN-NEA)? Enforces maritime 
law, engages in anti piracy operations, executes drug interdiction 
strikes, pursues smugglers, and performs high risk search and rescue. 
And, of course, acts as (like the coast gaurd) a second or third line 
combat formation in times of war with limited land, air, sea, 
undersea, and low orbit capabilities.  

YMMV. 

Tom. 
/************************************************
Thomas Barclay		     
Voice: (613) 831-2018 x 4009
Fax: (613) 831-8255

 "C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot.  C++ makes
 it harder, but when you do, it blows away your whole leg."
 -Bjarne Stroustrup
**************************************************/