Prev: Re: ARRRGHHHH!!! ( Was Re: Rules for BFG/FT Conversion.) Next: Re: [FT] NAC Fleet Roster (unofficial, of course)

Re: [FT] NAC Fleet Roster (unofficial, of course)

From: devans@u...
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 13:58:39 -0600
Subject: Re: [FT] NAC Fleet Roster (unofficial, of course)

Tom, de man, sez:
***
>  You might run into that large a
> force if and only if an entire Fleet were deployed, reinforced by the
> capital ships from another fleet.

that is pretty much what the rn fleet at jutland was.

Tom
***

Well, the fleet in home waters. I've not checked, but my feeling is that
the fleet around the world had a much heavier balance towards smaller
ships. Even if not, we ARE talking about a time period of expansion and
exploration, and I think stretching the fleet over larger and larger
areas
would require more ships, tending towards smaller ships.

Again, I haven't done the numbers on what were in the fleets, but during
Napoleonic times, it was the frigate that was the work horse of the
navy. A
large battle might well have large numbers of fodder ships simply
because
they existing in large numbers because, between such battles, they are
so
useful. No matter, I'm not suggesting the Napoleonic as THE model, just
another illuminating one.

All, whether discussing FT, DS, or SG, try not to model the future too
closely to the past. Whether tactical 'realities', command-and-control,
size of equipment, physics, the future is going to be JUST like today,
only
different.

The_Beast

Prev: Re: ARRRGHHHH!!! ( Was Re: Rules for BFG/FT Conversion.) Next: Re: [FT] NAC Fleet Roster (unofficial, of course)