Re: (FT) Unofficial NSL Order of Battle Jannary 01,2083

On Wed, 3 Feb 1999, John M. Atkinson wrote:

> It'll be cool, it'll be fun...it's gonna *suck* wrote:
> 
> > This is repeated throughout the entire NSL Roster. It doesn't...seem
> > very real to me. Does the (contemporary?) German Naval Order of
Battle
> > reflect this??
> 
> This is apparently loosely based on German OOB at Jutland or something
> like that.  And yes, the ideal is to have each battle squadron or
> carrier group be interchangable.

this makes a lot of sense to me - the components of the fleet should be
as
interchangeable as possible. why might a fleet have squadrons of varying
composition by choice? oh, i know: to do different missions. still,
there
would be a relatively small number of different squadron types ("cruiser
squadron", "reinforced cruiser squadron", "independent cruiser
squadron").

also, bear in mind that that OoB was nominal - the actual situtation
will
be that, minus ships out for refit, minus ships detached for
miscellaneous
other reasons, plus obsolete and auxiliary ships attached to the main
fleets, and then randomised by cross-attachment. recall that no plan
survives contact with the enemy!

Tom