|
Name/Sex : USS Enterprise CV-6, Yorktown Class Aircraft Carrier Where is our character born? Newport News, Virginia Who are our characters parents? Secretary of the Navy Claude A. Swanson and his wife, Lulie Swanson What great event has occurred to herald the arrival of our hero(ine)? October 3rd, 1934 Harry Wallace yawned. It was a few minutes past midnight, and he still had six hours to go on his shift. Still, it could have been worse-three years ago, he hadn't had any job at all, and though the hours for a security job were bad, and the pay was worse, Harry was glad to have it. As he strolled through the empty shipyard, Harry swung his flashlight left and right, tracing the beam across the concrete and steel jungle around him. The Depression had hit the shipyard hard, but there were still plenty of projects in various stages of completion. The biggest of them, of course, was the Enterprise. Over eight hundred feet long from bow to stern, and weighing nearly twenty thousand tons, the Enterprise was perhaps the grandest ship Harry had ever seen. He'd watched them lay down the keel less than half a year before, and he'd marveled as the titanic structure had risen up rapidly. Now nearly complete, the ship was scheduled to be launched later that day, before undergoing a lengthy fitting-out and commissioning process. "Beautiful, ain't she?" Harry spun around, shocked. In front of him, a strangely dressed man was staring up at the incomplete Enterprise. "Hey buddy, you're not supposed to be here!" Harry said, approaching the man cautiously. The man ignored him. "You know, she's gonna have a great career. Absolutely incredible, you wouldn't even believe it." Harry's mouth twisted into a frown as he tried to understand the man's thick Brooklyn accent. "Buddy, I told you once, I'll tell you again, you're not supposed to be here. You drunk or something?" Sighing, the man turned to face Harry. Harry immediately froze when he saw the man holding a long, pointed shiv in his right hand. Seeing Harry freeze up, the man laughed and put up his hands. "Oh, don't worry, this isn't for you. This is for some british son-of-a-bitch, in case he lets anything bad happen to her." He pointed his thumb back at the dark carrier. "Still," he said, "I've been here long enough. Just wanted to get a good look at her, you know? Like watchin' your kid being born." Sliding the shiv into his pocket, the man walked up, and patted Harry on the shoulder. "Just take good care of her for me." With that, the man walked off into the darkness. A half-minute after he disappeared, Harry found the courage to begin moving again, and quickly ran back to the nearest security checkpoint. Within an hour, a dozen armed security guards swarmed the yard where the man had last been seen. In spite of their efforts, however, they found no sign of the man. All they found was a small, sharpened improvised knife, with a large, elegant letter E carved into the blade.
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2017 02:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 09:44 |
|
|
If it's any consolation, we already know how your entry was going to end.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2017 17:03
|
|
|
We must keep the Enterprise away from any and all British influences. That's why I'm voting B-the ship and its crew must be well-prepared for the long war ahead.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2017 17:08
|
|
|
I've read this book, I know where this is going. 10% to Damage Control
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2017 14:12
|
|
|
Let's not be so hasty. In modern warfare, it is necessary to carry a well-balanced striking force, capable of attacking the enemy from above and below. Only through maximizing our advantage in aircraft technology and tactics will we prevail in any future conflict- so first things first, let's evaluate the cutting edge of aviation technology, to examine which aircraft we shall potentially be equipping the Enterprise with. Torpedo Bomber: Douglas TBD Devestator  First flown in 1935, the Devastator was a groundbreaking aircraft when it was first introduced. The Navy's first all-metal monoplane, the Devastator also featured semi-retractable landing gear, folding wings, and integration of the new Norden Bombsight, creating an incredibly advanced and powerful aircraft. However, though it was only introduced a few years ago, the Devastator is already growing long in the tooth-it's slow, maneuvers poorly, and has very weak defensive armament. The Navy is well aware of these flaws, and has already begun soliciting bids for the TBD's eventual replacement. However, this replacement is not expected to enter service for some time, and should the Enterprise begin sailing to war within the next several years, the Devastator will likely remain its standard torpedo and bombing aircraft. Performance: Maximum speed: 206 mph (179 knots, 331 km/h) at 8,000 ft (2,400 m) Cruise speed: 128 mph (111 knots, 206 km/h) Range: 435 mi (700 km) (378 nmi, 700 km) with Mk XIII Torpedo, 716 mi (623 nmi, 1,152 km) with 1,000 lb (454 kg) bombs Service ceiling: 19,500 ft (5,945 m) Rate of climb: 720 ft/min (3.7 m/s) Armament Guns: 1 × forward-firing 0.30 in (7.62 mm) or 0.50 (12.7 mm) machine gun 1 × 0.30 in (7.62 mm) machine gun in rear cockpit Bombs: 1 × Mark XIII torpedo or 1 × 1,000 lb (454 kg) bomb or 2 × 500 lb (227 kg) bombs or 12 × 100 lb (45 kg) bombs Fighters: Presently, the Navy's fighter arm is in a period of severe transition. During the 1920s and early 1930s, cloth-covered biplanes with fixed landing gear were the cutting edge of aviation technology-now, navies across the world are racing to implement new technologies such as retractable landing gear, folding wings, all-metal construction, and monoplane designs. Fortunately, the US Navy is right on the forefront of aviation design, baring some unthinkable-and frankly, laughable-developments by the clearly backwards and inferior Empire of Japan. Grumman F3F  The most modern fighter of the US Navy, the F3F is a symbol of the rapid pace of aviation technology. A development of Grumman's previous FF and F2F designs, the F3F is perhaps the most modern biplane ever built for the US Navy. Its days, however, are limited-with the advent of new monoplane designs like the Brewster F2A Buffalo and the Grumman F4F Wildcat, it is unlikely the F3F will remain in service for much longer. Even so, until those designs mature, the F3F will remain the US Navy's primary carrier-based fighter. Performance Maximum speed: 264 mph (229 kn, 425 km/h) at 15,250 ft (4,658 m) Cruise speed: 150 mph (130 kn, 240 km/h) Range: 980 mi (850 nmi, 1,600 km) Service ceiling: 33,200 ft (10,120 m) Rate of climb: 2,800 ft/min (14 m/s) at sea level Armament Guns: 1× 0.30 in (7.62 mm) M1919 machine gun, 500 rounds (left) 1× 0.50 in (12.7 mm) M2 machine gun, 200 rounds (right) Bombs: 2× 116 lb (52.6 kg) Mk IV bombs, one under each wing Brewster F2A Buffalo  The first of the Navy's new monoplane fighters, the Brewster Buffalo is likely to enter service within the next year. As a monoplane, its speed and maneuverability greatly outclasses previous biplane designs, and though it retains the same armament of its predecessor with one .50 caliber and one .30 caliber machine gun, future variations are expected to carry a ferocious armament of up to four .50 caliber guns. However, the plane is somewhat overbuilt, and is heavier and less maneuverable than other monoplane designs. Performance Maximum speed: 321 mph (517 km/h; 279 kn) Cruise speed: 161 mph (259 km/h; 140 kn) Range: 965 mi (839 nmi; 1,553 km) Service ceiling: 33,200 ft (10,100 m) Rate of climb: 2,440 ft/min (12.4 m/s) Armament Guns: 2 × 0.50 in (12.7 mm) nose-mounted M2 Browning machine guns 2 × 0.50 in (12.7 mm) wing-mounted M2 Browning machine guns Grumman F4F Wildcat  A development of Grumman's earlier F3F biplane fighter, the F4F Wildcat is currently in testing and will likely not enter service for another year or so. At present, the Wildcat is currently somewhat of a boondoggle, with the XF4F-1 and XF4F-2 variants showing only marginal performance increases over the Brewster Buffalo. However, Grumman's next promised variant, the XF4F-3, has the Navy very intrigued. Planned to be powered by a supercharged variant of Pratt and Whitney's R-1830 Twin Wasp and armed with four .50 caliber machine-guns, should expectations be met the Wildcat promises to offer a significant performance increase over other existing and planned aircraft types-if, of course, these promises are actually met. Performance Maximum speed: 331 mph (531 km/h) Range: 845 mi (1,360 km) Service ceiling: 39,500 ft (12,000 m) Rate of climb: 2,303 ft/min (11.7 m/s) Armament Guns: 4 × 0.50 in (12.7 mm) AN/M2 Browning machine guns with 450 rounds per gun Bombs: 2 × 100 lb (45 kg) bombs and/or 2 × 58 gal (220 L) drop tanks Dive Bombers/Scout Aircraft* Northrop BT-1  The current primary dive bomber of the US Navy, the BT-1 is, to put it lightly, a bit of a dog. With poor handling at the best of times and very poor handling at low speeds, the type is not particularly well-suited to carrier operations and has already killed several pilots via landing accidents. Presently, Northrop and Douglas (Northrop's parent company) are going through corporate restructuring, but have promised significant increases to the the BT-1's performance through redesigns of the airframe and integration of a new powerplant. Tentatively, should these improvements pan out and the type accepted for further production, these changes are likely to be introduced under the planned name of the SBD Dauntless. Performance Maximum speed: 193 knots (222 mph, 357 km/h) at 9,500 ft (2,900 m) Cruise speed: 167 knots (192 mph, 309 km/h) Range: 1,000 nmi (1,150 mi 1,852 km) Service ceiling: 25,300 ft (7,710 m) Rate of climb: 1,270 ft/min (6.5 m/s) Armament Guns: 1 × .50 in (12.7 mm) machine gun 1 × .30 in (7.62 mm) machine gun Bombs: 1,000 lb (454 kg) bomb under fuselage Recommendations The Aircraft Carrier is still a relatively new weapons system, and to an extent it has yet to be truly proven on the battlefield. However, through extensive exercises, the US Navy has been able to come to a number of conclusions regarding the platform's potential, and what elements should be emphasized as particularly important in carrier-based aircraft. The most important of these is simple: Range. Should an enemy fleet be detected, having long-ranged aircraft will enable the Enterprise and other carrier groups to launch strikes sooner, and potentially out of retaliation range of other carriers or air bases. Speed is also critical, as faster aircraft will be able to reach the enemy fleet sooner, and potentially put them out of action before they can begin spotting their own carrier strikes. Presently, the longest-ranged aircraft in the arsenal is the Northrop BT-1. Though the type has had some severe developmental issues, it cannot be denied that promised developments from Douglas will fix many of the aircraft's present issues, and the long range, good speed, and modern developments (Such as dive brakes) of the type cannot be denied. Granted, bombs are typically less effective at sinking enemy ships than torpedo-however, the Devastator is already growing obsolete, and with its planned replacement still far off on the horizon, we cannot risk going to war with such a dated platform as our primary offensive weapon. As such, I recommend the following aircraft complement: 1 fighter squadron (VF) composed of 18 fighters 1 bombing squadron (VB) composed of 18 dive bombers 1 scouting squadron (VS) composed of 18 dive bombers* 1 torpedo squadron (VT) composed of 18 torpedo bombers *Note that these aircraft, while ostensibly assigned for scouting, are also fully capable and intended to be used as an additional dive-bomber squadron. Acebuckeye13 fucked around with this message at 16:41 on Jul 2, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2017 16:02
|
|
|
simplefish posted:I appreciate the effort that went into this post. Basically, carrier operations are the modern equivalent of combined-arms on the ground. Just as a successful ground attack requires artillery, infantry, armor, and aircraft to be used together effectively, a carrier attack requires proper planning and coordination between torpedo bomber, dive bomber, fighter, and scouting elements. First and foremost, a carrier strike requires proper scouting-after all, it does little good to launch a strike if you don't know where the enemy is. Fortunately, this is one area where the carrier can enjoy a significant amount of assistance. Both battleships and cruisers often carry their own spotting aircraft, and land-based patrol bombers and flying boats can cover vast swaths of the ocean to try and spot the enemy. Ideally, of course, you'll want to spot the enemy before they can spot you, but in many cases this can't be helped. Next, you'll want to form up the strike, comprising (At least) of one dive-bomber squadron and one torpedo squadron. Ideally, the strike will attack using a coordinated Low-High approach, where the dive bombers will attack from high altitude, while the torpedo planes attack from low altitude. This has the benefit of splitting up the enemy CAP, as any planes attacking the torpedo bombers will be unable to then climb to altitude to attack the dive-bombers, and vice-versa. This also maximizes the value of the strike's fighter escort-they can determine where the enemy CAP is attacking, and then react to defend where they're most needed. The other important thing to remember is that bombs and torpedoes do very different and very important things to destroy ships. Torpedoes do the most to actually sink a ship, by breaching the hull and allowing in copious amounts of water. Bombs, however, are critical for destroying the internals of a ship, damaging systems, causing fires, and splitting damage control efforts. While a bomb alone won't sink a ship, it can cause it to become a burned-out hulk, which operationally is almost as good. "Maximum Elan", while surely an excellent philosophy for the Enterprise and her crew to follow, doesn't quite correlate to the actual makeup of the ship's aircraft complement. Each aircraft has a vital role to play, and it shall only be through the use of proper combined-arms techniques that the Enterprise and her crew will be able to inflict maximum damage upon the enemy.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 09:44 |
|
|
Hooray, I'm an NPC!  My votes: 20% to Air Control 20% to Fighters My reasoning is pretty simple-we want to maximize the effectiveness of our aircraft, being our primary offensive and defensive tool, and maxing our fighters will A) protect our dive bombers and torpedo planes on their way to the target, and B) improve our CAP and prevent retaliatory strikes from getting anywhere close to the Enterprise.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2017 21:59
|
|