Moderator: MOD_Command
Just started playing this. Looks good. A couple questions:
1. I noticed the Roosevelt is down for repairs. Is its Carrier Air Wing on the way to Norway?
2. I always thought the plan was for a MEB (and associated fixed wing assets) to fly into Norway within a few days of hostilities starting and marry up with prepositioned equipment. True/False?
Perhaps this was ommitted to make it more of a "fair" fight but it seems like NATO would marshal more fixed wing (at least one carrier or USMC/USAF/ANG and position them in Iceland/Shetlands/Norway) before "running the gauntlet." Similar to the OOB's in the Northern Fury scenarios.
Thanks for creating this!
Sorry this took so long to reply but I'm working mid-shifts and never at my best then
So yes then the second strike was about on time. I was toying with maybe adding a second Soviet SAG around Frunze. I did add the basing for the SSNs/SSGNs
Yes and no. The Northern Wedding and Ocean Safari exercises had the amphibs bring at least a MAU to two MAUs to Norway in the late 70s and early 80s. As I recall toward the end of the cold war '87-'91 some USMC equipment was stockpiled in the caves for the Marines to marry up with but I don't think that was ever completed. Interestingly we are currently returning to stockpiling prepositioned forces in Norway.
Prestocking for a U.S. Marine Corps Expeditionary Brigade.
In 1981 American and Norwegian authorities signed an agreement to store the heavy equipment of a U.S. air-landed Marine expeditionary brigade (known as the NALMEB) in the central Norwegian county of Trøndelag. The original plan was to store the equipment in northern Norway, which was where the brigade would operate if it were deployed. This was hindered by strong political opposition in Norway, and a compromise solution had to be found farther south. As compensation, the heavy equipment for South Norwegian Brigade 6 was stored in the north. Also, the Marine brigade’s air element was allowed to fly directly to its designated airfields in the north. The net result was thus a considerable strengthening of the defense of northern Norway.
What was the opposition to prestocking for the Marines in northern Norway all about? First, there were those who opposed any prestocking in Norway for the U.S. Marine Corps. Second, there were those who supported it in principle but not in northern Norway. The general opposition to prestocking must, I believe, be seen as a repercussion of the broad and general political opposition in Norway to the war in Vietnam. The war, which had ended in 1975, was still fresh in memory. Also, the Marine Corps was seen as the epitome of American expeditionary capability; Norwegian politicians feared that prestocking its equipment would pull the country into American global strategy. There were also those who
felt that storing equipment for foreign troops could undermine the Norwegian base policy, while others pointed to the fact that because the brigade was nuclear capable, the presence of its equipment would represent a challenge to the nation’s nuclear policy.
Those who supported prestocking in principle but opposed it in northern
Norway feared that a storage site there would provoke the Soviets and thus be contrary to the long-standing Norwegian policy of low tension in the north. This, by the way, was a general problem with the Maritime Strategy, as many Norwegians saw it. For the Norwegian government, which wanted to tie the United States to the defense of Norway, on the one hand, and on the other to minimize internal debate and political division over defense and security policy, handling the strategy was a difficult balancing act.24
The United States12 has a bilateral treaty with
Norway to participate in the defense of Norway
with a brigade size unit from the United States
Marine Corps.13 This unit will have some of its
equipment and supplies prestocked in Norway
(finished in 1989). The size of the unit is
determined, but no unit has been earmarked. A
standing headquarters (4th MAB) is responsible for
all planning for Norway. Participating units in
exercises in Norway come all from FMF Atlantic.
FMF Atlantic also sends units to the Mediterranean
and Okinawa (MAU) on a permanent basis and also
units to other parts in Europe, the Middle East,
Central America/Carribbean Ocean. FMF Atlantic is
also responsible for planning of a MPS
configurate MAB (6th MAB).
All these deployments mean the unit (MAB) which is
going to Norway is task-organized prior to the
deployment from available ready forces and sent to
winter training at training bases in CONUS for 4-6
weeks before they leave for Norway
Thanks for the reply. Yeah, I really think NATO Striking Fleet Atlantic would have done an excellent job of clearing the Norweigian Sea of the Soviets. Especially since this scenario takes place right after VADM "Hammerin Hank" Mustin was in charge. NATO would have marshalled quite a force to turn the Norweigian Sea in to a "NATO Lake" and follow on, if necessary into the Barents.ORIGINAL: BeirutDude
Just started playing this. Looks good. A couple questions:
1. I noticed the Roosevelt is down for repairs. Is its Carrier Air Wing on the way to Norway?
Two AS-4 Kitchens hit her catching much of the air wing on the flight and hanger decks. (truth is the air wing just weighed the scenario too heavily toward NATO. The original version had the Roosevelt in the SAG [CVBG] and it just wasn't a contest!).
2. I always thought the plan was for a MEB (and associated fixed wing assets) to fly into Norway within a few days of hostilities starting and marry up with prepositioned equipment. True/False?
Yes and no. The Northern Wedding and Ocean Safari exercises had the amphibs bring at least a MAU to two MAUs to Norway in the late 70s and early 80s. As I recall toward the end of the cold war '87-'91 some USMC equipment was stockpiled in the caves for the Marines to marry up with but I don't think that was ever completed. Interestingly we are currently returning to stockpiling prepositioned forces in Norway.
Perhaps this was ommitted to make it more of a "fair" fight but it seems like NATO would marshal more fixed wing (at least one carrier or USMC/USAF/ANG and position them in Iceland/Shetlands/Norway) before "running the gauntlet." Similar to the OOB's in the Northern Fury scenarios.
Yes it was just a NATO slaughter of the Northern Banner Fleet in playtesting with more aircraft and the CVBG (either tipped the balance too much). Just goes to show how far the Soviet Union was outclassed at the time the Berlin Wall fell! I've attached the last playtest with the USS Roosevelt CVBG and additional NATO aircraft included & I think you can see how much they just skew the scenario in favor of the West. By 1989 the Soviets were just too far behind, with a few good units, but not the overall top to bottom skills of NATO. BTW the "No Roosevelt" variant in that ZIP was the beginning of the variant that eventually became "The Gauntlet"
I also played with creating a Med variant of the first 7 days of the war (still am actually) and it is just a Soviet slaughter! Between the UK, Italy, France and US and with no decent bases/logistics the Soviets are simply butchered. Also nobody ever explained to me how the Badgers and Backfires were getting past Turkey's AAW/ADA/SAMs and Incirlik, so they really had to cross over Bulgaria and Yugoslavia to have any chance and that brings them into the NATO AAW intercept range from Italy and Greece. Bottom Line, the Soviet Med fleet/deployment was doomed! All they could do was die well...
Thanks for creating this!
Enjoy
