Re: Vietnam and modern combat

On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 22:26:49 -0400 Ryan Gill <rmgill@mindspring.com>
writes:
<snip>
>When I poke my dilettante, military, hobbyist 
>head into naval affairs, the articles I see in 
>things like Proceedings and other Naval Journals 
>seem to indicate a big concern over littorial 
>combat and how to handle it with a blue water 
>navy.
>

As well it should.  

That said, no brown water navy versus blue water navy fight has gonme
the
distance so it's still just rtheoretical worries.  So far...

Subs might not get away from a force with a SSN escorting that force but
it doesn't help the guys on the CV or LHA that the guy that got them is
sunk.  Missile boats become more then targets in some conditions.  Same
logic, you sink all thrtee missile boats but lose a Cruiser, CV or major
amophibious unit - fair trade?

THAT said, The blue water force needs 1) all weather/night capable
(infrared/radar/ESP!?!) capable air units scouring the surface (and
underwater as much as possible, 2) Vigilant surface and subsurface ASW
forces preceding and flanking major forces, 3) CAP in sufficient numbers
(or air bases suppressed into impotence,) and 4) SAMs that are good
enough to keep the pesky MBs/SSBNs/SSBs lurking in their lairs/hide outs
from scoring a hit.  Expensive, untested (in real combat currently) and
unpredictable.	I do not expect the third world SSs to be up to Dutch,
Brit, Aussie, German standards.   But Napoleon said to plan on being
lucky.

Sweat now or bleed later.

Gracias,
Glenn

________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!