Re: [GZG] The internal workings of Fleets

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lHi, David,

On 8/22/05, David Billinghurst <davebill@clear.net.nz> wrote:
> 
> Hi All,
>  I was particulary interested in 'Indy's' Unofficial Fleet Lists. Is
this 
> project still going, or has Indy moved on to other things? The last
updates 
> seem to be 2002ish.
> 

The project is kinda stalled at the moment. There are some individual
ship 
design correction that I need t o make yet, and at some point I'd like
to 
revisit the other powers to flesh out some general fleet compositions
for 
them. But time is a commodity that keeps being filled with too many
other 
things as of late. :-(

While I've read a lot on Napoleonic Naval, I know next to nothing about 
> modern Naval tactics or operations. To have someone suggest Fleet OOBs
is a 
> great starting point towards planning one's fleet (every fleet can't
have 10 
> SDNs after all, no matter how much we'd like to - the MUCr 75,000
would 
> begger the state for starters).
>  Indy's lists seem to follow modern naval useage (or as much of it as
I 
> understand) in that there are Destroyer and Cruiser Flotillas that do
the 
> bulk of the patrolling and showing the flag, and 'Heavy Units'/Strike
Units 
> which, like modern US Carrier Groups (for instance), are deployed from
base 
> areas to where the serious fighting is.
> 

*nod*
Yes, my lists were designed pretty much as you ascertained.

What I would like to know is how the command structure works when a 
> Destroyer flotilla (for example) is attached to a Strike unit to
augment 
> it's patrol strength. Would the commanding officer of a Destroyer
flotilla 
> (a senior captain or commodore, I guess) suddenly find his unit broken
up 
> and deployed as the admiral of the Strike Unit sees fit? Or would the 
> admiral's orders come to the Commodore to be relayed to the units of
the 
> Destroyer Flotilla?
>  The latter seems more cumbersome and more likely to induce errors or 
> delays. In the former case, is it just part of the way 'things are
done' 
> that a chap (or chapess) should expect his lovely little command to be

> deployed as the Admiral sees fit, perhaps split between divisions of a
fleet 
> (do modern fleets still divide their ships into divisions under
subordinate 
> admirals or senior captains or is everything run by the admiral?) and 
> perhaps lost to him if the admiral deploys one of the fleet divisions
away 
> in a multi-system fight?
> 

I say...write something up! :-) 

Mk