Re: Sensor Range Question and Naval Strategy links

the links are at the end, with some annotations.

At 7:25 AM -0700 4/29/99, Thomas Anderson wrote:
>
>> In almost all cases I can think of, naval
>> battles, even deep water interceptions such as Midway, took place in
>> relationship to a fixed point.
>
>isn't that what i was saying? looking back now i see i wasn't very
clear.

s'okay, I wrote my reply at about 6:30 this morning.

>> This happens even when the objective is
>> the enemy fleet and not a specific target.
>
>this is *exactly* what i said - battles need not take place *at*
special
>points, because you can derive a new point from any two existing
special
>points - midway between a planet (fixed special point) and a jump-in
point
>(non-fixed special point, ie only special because that is where the
fleet
>jumped in this morning; it won't be special tomorrow).

Yup, in all cases a fleet is going to or coming from somewhere (going
to Vladivostok for Tsushima, coming from Kiel for Jutland), more
important is that the objective is a fixed point. I think we better
agree to agree.

>i was afraid it might not. history has a tendency to do that to me :-).

happens to the best of us

>> At Jutland the Germans were intercepted on a sortie from a fixed
point,
>> and while passing through a narrow stretch of sea.
>
>ah; my memory of the geography of jutland is rather hazy, i must say.

the entrance from the Baltic to the North Sea is a 50 mile wide
straight called the Skagerrak. That simplified the job of the Royal
Navy enormously. The North Sea is pretty big to hunt fleets in, even
with zeppelins and scout groups with wireless, at least without radar.
I've played Jutland (Avalon Hill) and can appreciate the task.

>> Although, due to the
>> strong influence of Mahan's theories, both fleets were trying to find
>> each other.
>
>i'm not familiar with Mahan, nor his theories; could you by any chance
>provided a pointer to some info, or some sort of potted "Mahan for
>Dummies" version?
>
>> I strongly recommend reading Mahan. His analyses just beg to be
applied
>> to a wargame, or preferrably wargames. It's on my list already.
>
>well, point me in his direction, and he can start keeping Sun Tzu
company
>on my shelf!
>
>> At Trafalgar, Nelson intercepted the Allied fleet on leaving port, it
>> justr took a long chase to bring them to battle. At Tsushima, Togo
>> intercepted the Russians at Tsushima Straight. Check a map, that's a
>> fixed point if I ever saw one; they Russians were also heading for a
>> known port (the only one they had left). Ditto for Midway, Intel
helped
>> here. The Solomons campaign is also a good example of combat at
>
>i'm assuming that was going to be "at sea" but that the 0630 effect got
in
>the way :-).

"... at a fixed point."

>but i take your point. tsushima is certainly an example of combat at a
>fixed point. i think trafalgar is sort of what i was saying: although
the
>fleets closed at a port, the actual interception (as in where the
battle
>was) was some way away. midway is a bit of a funny example, as it was
>basically a carrier action, which has different logistics from line
action
>(the "weapon" ranges are comparable to the strategic distances). that
>said, substitute leyte gulf (iirc - the last real battleship action?)
and
>your point holds, as that was fought in, well, leyte gulf, a restricted
>piece of water.

Leyte was a whipping, even with Halsey's misjudgement. The battleships
went into it at Surigao Strait (oops, I've been mispelling it) where
the USN set up in advance and caught the Japanese with, in order PT
boats, destroyers, cruisers and then battleships crossing the Japanses
T. Only one DD escaped ( see "Japanese Destroyer Captain", Hara,
Ballantine Books, 1961 for the autobiography of the man who wrote the
book on torpedo combat for the IJN, he also went through the first
round of the Solomons campaign without losing a single crewman. Get
Cutler's "The Battle of Leyte Gulf" (Pocket books, in paperback) for
the whole story. And for why commanders in the field *must* get some
sleep.

And given the scale of the Pacific war, aircraft ranges (~200nm for
USN, ~300 for IJN) drop back down to the (nearly) tactical scale.

>> At the Battle of Britain, the
>> Germans were going after specific targets (just changing the
selection
>> at ill-advised intervals). The RAF vectored their interceptors in on
>> the bombers.
>
>so, the germans sent bombers to, say, Leeds. did the battle take place
at
>Leeds? no, it took place at a point determined by the speed and
starting
>points of the bombers and interceptors. that is exactly what i was
saying:
>start with two special points (bomber base, Leeds) and make a third
>(interception area).

Ah, I was thrown by the generalism of "a gigantic piece of sky." Once
we get down to definitions, we've agreed in principle. A good Battle of
Britain game uses area movement anywas, see R.A.F. from West End for
the best of the breed (IMO)

>> In all cases in air combat. the defending fighters tried to intercept
>> before the targets. It is far better to shoot down a loaded bomber
than
>> one that has already dropped its bombs.
>
>precisely; this is why it's better to intercept an attacking fleet well
>away from your planet, as if you leave it until they're close, they can
>just lob in a few nukes anyway.
>
>now, i suspect we really agree on the essential concept (engagements
occur
>at certain points, but not necessarily permanent points), but differ
over
>a detais and the wording. what an unprecedented situation in the annals
of
>humanity :-).

Excatly, although I'd term it (and I'm as picky as a dragon when it
comes to Names) "combat occurs in reference to a fixed point."
Intercepting away from the target is either good tactics or common
sense, take your pick.

Binhan Lin sums it all up nicely, I must be losing my touch. No, I
think it's my mind...

Links (generated by Sherlock from my set of General search engines).
List is slightly edited, and in descending order of relevance. I have
annotated where I saw fit to visit the site (and didn't remove it from
the list).

The first link (plus the Farragut bio later) is the closest I could
find online to the text of Mahan's works. I own a copy of a Naval
Institute Press collection. Try this Amazon link for a search on
"Alfred Thayer Mahan"
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/generic-quicksearch-query/002-9755753-
0313
044 (IIRC, the last link is the excelelnt collection I have (can't find
it right now)).

http://nsa.nps.navy.mil/Courses/NS-3252.html

visit this first, it's the course outline for the Joint and Maritime
Strategy postgrad course. Links to a very nice set of .pdf files on
current doctrine.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0313256446/thetheodorerooseA/00
1-11
88927-7683549
http://www.clausewitz.com/CWZHOME/Bibl/ALFXBIBL.html
http://www.history.navy.mil/biblio/biblio1/bibli1aq.htm
http://home.earthlink.net/~ldmiller/Lesson_58_Notes.htm
http://www.mnsinc.com/cbassfrd/CWZHOME/Bibl/ALFXBIBL.html
http://www.barnesreview.org/nov94contents.htm
http://www.spanam.simplenet.com/puertonaval1.htm
http://www.csbs.utsa.edu/users/jreynolds/spanam.txt

"U. S. History Survey: The New Imperial Power" lecture notes.
Interesting

http://www.civilwarbks.com/cg_ref.htm
http://www.thehistorynet.com/AmericanHistory/articles/1997/0297_cover.ht
m
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/events/spanam/people/pers-wbd/pers-wb
d.ht
m
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jun1996/b062896_bt400-96.html
http://www.spear.navy.mil/ships/ddg72/index.htm
http://www.press.jhu.edu/press/books/titles/f97/f97suin.htm (Beware of
Java !)
http://www.stratisc.org/pub/PN1_BIBLIOGJOM.html (good bibliography,
rest of site in French)
http://www.libarts.sfasu.edu/history/134-Unit5D.html (American
Imperialism, see Tuchman's "The Proud Tower" for more on this)
http://wwics.si.edu/organiza/affil/wilson/WWICS/WHATSNEW/NEWS/newbooks.h
tm
http://www.stratisc.org/pub/PN1_COLSONSAME.html (long article from that
French page again).
http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/ships/destroyers/mahan/christen.txt
http://www.ih.navy.mil/navy.htm (pre-dreadnaught and other photos)
http://www.school.is/handbook-nofrms.htm
http://pc-78-120.udac.se:8001/WWW/Nautica/Bibliography/AN54.html
http://www.smplanet.com/imperialism/letter.html (First Contact with the
Japanese)
http://alldirect.com/section3.cfm?CartID=276539390021798&subject=HIS0270
60+
(tasty list of books)
http://www.smplanet.com/imperialism/letter.html
http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/2spamwar.htm
http://www.uq.net.au/~zzddelli/navyhome.htm

"Naval History On-Line" website. Articles, references, database and
discussion board

http://www.encompass.net/ctyson/civwar/farmain.htm

Read Thayer's "Admiral Farragut" Online

http://www.nwc.navy.mil/library/default.htm

Navy War College's list of links,

excerpt or summary, I'm not sure.
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/feros-pg.htm is the prof's
homepage. Ridiculously long list of, what appear to be, excellent links.

Michael Carter Llaneza
Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1991-1950
Devolution is very real to me.
http://216.101.185.88
Whenever I hear the "Odd Couple" theme, I get this image of Dennis
Rodman borrowing Marge Schott's toothbrush.