LionofPerth

A new project that has started to eat into my time, I am writing about a sailor/pilot on a ship in the far future. While I know my history when it comes to naval engagements, ranging from Jutland to Coral Sea and Midway, I need a better idea of the doctrine and tactics behind such an engagement.

I recently found Fleet Tactics and Coastal Combat, second edition, and have been reading that, but I was wondering if anyone knew of any other good texts that cover tactics and operations for naval, carrier warfare?

Thanks ahead.

__________________
The plot bunnies! Make them STOP!

Sam Winchester

Read Tom Clancy's Submarine. It's a good guide to naval warfare.

Sam.

__________________
To those who live by and never stray from the creedo of "show, don't tell," here's a thought - it's called storytelling not storyshowing.

nacreous

strategy by B. Hart
a layman's guide to naval strategy by brodie
are ntwo classics in this subject
good luck you have alot to learn - its a big subject.
cheers

__________________
nacreous - a type of high-flying cloud which often reflects the setting sun back to the earth long after darkness has fallen on the land.

lin

One thing you might want to deal with is getting around the pretty prevalent idea that "blue water" naval combat has no future.

__________________

nacreous

Meditating on the subject I have changed my mind. The very best and quickest way for you to attain a high degree of knowledge on this wide subject is to learn and play a naval warfare game called Harpoon. It is very detailed and will teach you the basics in a matter of hours. It is also a great game all on its own sake.

__________________
nacreous - a type of high-flying cloud which often reflects the setting sun back to the earth long after darkness has fallen on the land.

LionofPerth

I've got Harpoon(main rules, ship book and quick reference guide) and Tom Clancy's Submarine as well. So I guess that's two good sources covered.

It's mroe a case I need a better understanding of modern ideas, so I can, in a way, hypothesize what it would be like in the future, namely, space.

Now, while I am developing my own table top war game in space, that doesn't cover the complexity of what you can do in a virtual world on the computer, and in a way, I need to achieve that level of complexity, at least behind the ship design, movement, ability to move and C2(Command and Control).

Honestly, I was also looking at the new Battlestar Galactica series on TV for ideas about how ships would fight, as it seems to be pretty real, at least for what it is. By this I mean moving a ship to protect a facing, different modes of fire for weapons (salvo vs flak) etc.

__________________
The plot bunnies! Make them STOP!

nacreous

Isnt Harpoon an excellent game? Do you know the rules very well yet? Maybe you could play out your chosen scenario before you actually begin writing it, or is this too late. I'd be eager to help if you wish. I love that game and havent played for many years.
good luck in any event

__________________
nacreous - a type of high-flying cloud which often reflects the setting sun back to the earth long after darkness has fallen on the land.

LionofPerth

Well, for one thing, I'm actually developing the game to test out battle ideas at the moment, so it a case of I'm not sure I have time for a game.

As for it being too late, well, the game part of it is only a first draft, and half done, so it's never too late, but unless you're in Perth West Australia, I highly doubt you'd be able to help me get a game or two in.

__________________
The plot bunnies! Make them STOP!

Non Serviam

There's only been one naval conflict using carriers since 1945, which was the Falklands War of 1982. Didn't really teach us much. We learned:

1) If you're Argentinian, don't send your light cruiser into waters occupied by torpedo-armed British submarines. (Brits are mean and nasty and will sink you even if you're outside the exclusion zone.)
2) If you're British, make sure you have something that can actually kill an exocet missile. (Britain didn't--when asked to explain this remarkable deficiency in our surface fleet, a naval planner shrugged and said "The Soviets don't have exocets". Duh.)
3) If you're Argentinian, when bombing warships from planes, do so from sufficient height to give your bombs time to arm. (The Argentines consistently bombed from such a low height their bombs hit the ships but didn't explode.)
4) If you're British and desperately short of transport for your land invasion, do try not to lose the ship that's carrying almost all your helicopters. (The Commandos and Paras ended up literally carrying almost all their gear in their backpacks the whole length of East Falkland, through southern hemisphere winter.)
5) If you're British, try not to sail your ship into clear view of the Argentines and then stop it to disembark troops because they might just bomb you and sink your ship.
6) If you're Argentinian, half the planes you send on every mission is not an acceptable rate of losses. Give up or change tactics.
7) If you're British, try not to sell most of your navy just before you get invaded. It's embarrassing, having to explain to the Australians that you've just revoked the sale of your aircraft carrier to them.
If you're a Latin American military junta, don't invade sovereign territory belonging to a G5 nation because they WILL retaliate and in conventional warfare, you WILL lose.

None of this is very surprising really.

__________________
Faith, n. Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel.
Law, n. The rule of past over present, the dead over the living, precedent over reason, syntax over sense and absurd fictions over urgent realities.
Patriot, n. A dangerous tool of the powers that be. A herd member who compensates for lack of self-respect by identifying with an abstraction. An enemy of individual freedom. A fancier of the rich, satisfying flavour of boot leather.

Swamp Thing

If you are dealing with space ships and stuff, you might look to Weber's Honor Harrington series. In Echos of Honor, I think, Weber introduces LAC carriers and does a pretty good job of describing their uses and weaknesses. He's not the best author I've ever read, but he's entertaining and seems to do a good job of thinking things through.

__________________
To identify the elements of style, perhaps we should begin by eliminating the idea of correctness.

- Mario Vargas Llosa

Jonathan A. F.

if you want some fact integrated into your space navy then I suggest also taking time to explore Nasa.gov and doing a little more research in that area. Whatever ideas you take from your research on Naval warfare you would have to modify somewhat to include a third dimension, since Space ships can go in all directions to maneuver..not just forward, backward, left right, and all in between.
In the end it really depends on if you're writing a space fantasy like Star wars or something more akin to 2001. Space Fantasies allow you to do just about anything you want.

__________________
Currently Reading: The Glorious Cause, Jeff Shaara
Currently Writing: HA! Not much.
Myspace My Deviant Art
My blog

LionofPerth

Johnathon A.F, in terms of the three dimensions, I was actually looking at Tom Clancy's SSN and Submarine, to get a better idea of how a ship could move in three dimensions. Not to mention I've played alot of Space RTS's over the years. Namely, the Homeworld series, O.R.B. and Nexus: The Juputer Incident. If anything, I've got a reasonable feeling/idea of how a ship should move in a full 3d environment, it's just a case of working the rest of it out. That, and more research isn't a bad thing in this case.

As well to this I've got Sonalysts 688I and their other submarine title in that box set with Fleet Command. If anything I maybe using those programs to simulate some ideas of mine.

Swamp thing, I've heard some critism of the Honour Harrington series, especially about the carriers. If anything, this is how I understand carriers, and their relative strengths, at least in post 1944 era.

A carrier is a remarkably sturdy warship, and when guarded correctly it is a very hard kill, namely, in the case of the US fleets, AWD's (Air Warfare Destroyers) with a ASW (Anti-Submarine Warfare) screens are tight and effective.

The greatest strength, and weakness of a carrier is the payload, or the fighter's on board. They effectively out range nearly all weapon systems when supported properly, namely inflight refueling, and can strike very effectively. Their weakness is that they are easy to destroy, and the wrong mix of fighters in comparison to attack craft is something which let the Japanese down in the long run. After battles like Coral Sea and Midway the focus was as much about the aircraft as it was the carrier itself. When the US fleets arrived in 1944 their ratio of fighters to attack craft allowed them to inflict a very high attrition damage to the Japanese fighters. While carriers themselves were still sunk, the high damage ratio was in the planes themselves, and what good is a carrier without any pilots and planes?

What the little the Falklands War did teach was the importance of AAW, or Anti-Air Warfare. If anything, this reinforces some of the lessons gained from WW2 about the importance of proper escort and CAP(Combat Air Patrol) doctrine. Not to mention proper strategic planning in general.

__________________
The plot bunnies! Make them STOP!

papertears

The naval surface warfare folks in Virginia used to have a website. I've lost the link, but it had some info on it. I suspect it might be less useful than it was in 1999.

LionofPerth

Well, maybe not, I mean if it does cover Air Warfare Destroyers as well as AAW developments, it could be useful, ad the missile warfare aspects could be useful, I'll see if I can find it.

__________________
The plot bunnies! Make them STOP!

Non Serviam

Hmm. Are you talking about ship-to-ship combat in space, Lion?

Because if so, I think it's pretty much a given that any foreseeable space battle will be about resources--specifically the number of nuclear missiles each ship can deploy, and the amount of fuel they have. A ship using any foreseeable means of propulsion will be very fuel-dependent, and only has a very limited number of fuel-efficient routes it can take between two points in gravity wells. Taking an unexpected route would cost twice or more the amount of fuel.

__________________
Faith, n. Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel.
Law, n. The rule of past over present, the dead over the living, precedent over reason, syntax over sense and absurd fictions over urgent realities.
Patriot, n. A dangerous tool of the powers that be. A herd member who compensates for lack of self-respect by identifying with an abstraction. An enemy of individual freedom. A fancier of the rich, satisfying flavour of boot leather.