US Navy operations in the Caucuses?

[VooDoo8-9]

Would it be realistic for the Navy to operate in the Caucuses region ? Looking at a map reveals a straight that may grant access to the area, in the south near Istanbul. ? Further study revals several bridges, none of which look tall enough to allow a carrier through. but I don't know for sure....anyone have a clue ?

[VirusAM]

Would it be realistic for the Navy to operate in the Caucuses region ? Looking at a map reveals a straight that may grant access to the area, in the south near Istanbul. ? Further study revals several bridges, none of which look tall enough to allow a carrier through. but I don't know for sure....anyone have a clue ?

 

 

 

No it wouldn’t for several reasons.

The first one is that there is an international treaty that doesn’t allow carrier operations in the black sea.

The second is that a carrier group would be well inside to the Russian A2/AD system.

And the reciprocal is true with the Turkey being a Nato country

[SpikeGondorff]

Smaller ships, perhaps. But not a carrier and its inevitable escort.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreux_Convention_Regarding_the_Regime_of_the_Straits

 

Regardless, it's a game with only 2 maps that have water. Put whatever you want in the Black Sea. :)

[Honez]

Guys VirusAM, is correct. Being an old Navy guy from the 80's we wouldn't have put a row boat in the waters of that region due to US/Russian tensions. But to my surprise the US does now have navel presence in the region as a response to the Russians being overly aggressive in the region. Check out this story

 

https://www.stripes.com/news/navy/uss-porter-enters-black-sea-as-navy-continues-to-boost-patrols-in-tense-region-1.602880

[QuiGon]

Guys VirusAM, is correct. Being an old Navy guy from the 80's we wouldn't have put a row boat in the waters of that region due to US/Russian tensions. But to my surprise the US does now have navel presence in the region as a response to the Russians being overly aggressive in the region. Check out this story

 

https://www.stripes.com/news/navy/uss-porter-enters-black-sea-as-navy-continues-to-boost-patrols-in-tense-region-1.602880

Not just the USN, but also the USCG has deployed ships to the Black Sea in recent years, like the USCGC Dallas following the Russo-Georgian war, as part of Operation Assured Delivery.

[baltic_dragon]

The restrictions in place are based upon Montreux Convention of 1936. It imposes many different restrictions on warships not belonging to Black Sea littoral states that wish to transit into the basin, among those limit or tonnage of a single ship (10 000t), maximum caliber or gun (203mm) etc. So there would be a good reason to allow carrier to operate in these waters - though those can be easily devised. It is enough that Turkey allows such ship to pass and there you go. The protest that would follow afterwards might just add to the story. Having said that I doubt something like this would happen without something really big going on in the region...

[Exorcet]

In general maps are a bit cramped and force compromises in setting up a combat situation. That said, if you wanted to involve the USN in Caucasus map, you don't really have any choice but to station them in the Black Sea, just like the Air Force would probably operate out of Turkey but instead needs to be completely in Georgia.

 

 

I just put my carriers way in the SW if I can and pretend they're further away.

[Habu_69]

USN would be extremely reluctant to deploy a carrier task force to a place like Black Sea where a few mines or other obstacles could remove it from action elsewhere. The Med is the exception that proves the rule.

[near_blind]

Guys VirusAM, is correct. Being an old Navy guy from the 80's we wouldn't have put a row boat in the waters of that region due to US/Russian tensions. But to my surprise the US does now have navel presence in the region as a response to the Russians being overly aggressive in the region. Check out this story

 

https://www.stripes.com/news/navy/uss-porter-enters-black-sea-as-navy-continues-to-boost-patrols-in-tense-region-1.602880

 

We used to send in surface ships to show the flag and to annoy the Russians in the 80's too. This took place south of Sevastopol in '88.

 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/36/USS_Yorktown_collision.jpg

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_Black_Sea_bumping_incident

[Pikey]

This would be one of the reasons the Marianas is free (I suspect), because the default map isn't appropriate for the large parts of DCSW focus. There's only so many PG map copies you can sell, some folks don't buy everything. The other shift is having large US overseas bases to explain the predominant US assets that are played in DCS. Plans come together slowly when you develop on a platform that is open.

[Bunny Clark]

While the Bosporus and Dardanelles are among the narrowest natural straits used for international navigation, both are thousands of feet wide and hundreds of feet deep at their narrowest and regularly transited by heavy freight and tanker traffic. There's no physical reason a US carrier battle group could not transit the straits.

 

Tactically, the Black Sea is about twice the size of the Persian Gulf (436,402 km2 vs 251,000 km2), and the US Navy has deployed carriers into the Gulf repeatedly, so I don't think room to maneuver is as big a concern as some have made it out to be. During the Cold War the Soviet Union comprised more than half the sea's coast line and the Soviets kept a powerful Black Sea fleet in Sevastapol, so the US Navy generally considered it to be "enemy territory" which would have been very risky to enter. Both of those conditions are now significantly changed.

 

The biggest problem would be political. As others have mentioned the pre-WWII Montreux Convention currently governs passage of the straits, but it's hardly completely authoritative. It gives most of the control of the straits to Turkey, a NATO "ally" which could choose to allow passage of American warships at the risk of a political incident. The UN also would like to see the straits transitioned over to its control, which is partly why Turkey has yet to sign the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.

[Bearfoot]

Tactically, the Black Sea is about twice the size of the Persian Gulf (436,402 km2 vs 251,000 km2), and the US Navy has deployed carriers into the Gulf repeatedly, so I don't think room to maneuver is as big a concern as some have made it out to be. During the Cold War the Soviet Union comprised more than half the sea's coast line and the Soviets kept a powerful Black Sea fleet in Sevastapol, so the US Navy generally considered it to be "enemy territory" which would have been very risky to enter. Both of those conditions are now significantly changed. .

 

Interesting, but I think the argument is flawed in two ways.

 

(1) The PG may be smaller, and US carriers may go there there, ... but presumably would NOT if there were actually going to fight with (as opposed to rattle sabers with) Iran? This article in fact suggests that carriers go into the Gulf precisely when it seems that there is no shooting war threat with Iran possible:

 

https://news.usni.org/2019/11/19/carrier-lincoln-enters-persian-gulf-after-6-months-nearby-truman-back-at-sea-ahead-of-relieving-lincoln

 

 

(2) Furthermore, the antiship weaponry of the nations there have a much more limited range than those available to Russia (or the Soviet Union on older timelines). With KH-22 ranges > 400 km, a Bears can takeoff from bases deep into the east behind mountains and secured by iron clad IADS, circle the base, launch their loads, and then land again to recycle the mission with an hour.

 

Sp. politics aside I find it difficult to accept that the US carriers would operated tactically in the Black Sea with any sane chain of command. And I don't accept the PG comparison either, b/c US carriers were not there operating tactically against any of the nations bordering the Gulf. The lessons of Santa Cruz remain valid to this day.:smilewink:

 

I agree with Mbot's take:

 

"You will quickly notice that the Black Sea, legal issues aside (which would be void in wartime anyway), would be too small to operate a carrier battle group in a hostile environment. The carrier's defensive screen would basically overlap with the enemy's own air defenses" and solution "

 

I also agree with their solution:

 

"You have to apply a little imagination and assume that the campaign takes place in the Eastern Mediterranean instead and that the Soviet Backfire strikes are coming across Turkey from their home bases on the Crimea."

 

 

 

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=260464

[Pikey]

As it stands, the West facing coastline of the Caucasus is suitable for Balkans simulations, the housing and climate and geography is close enough. You can get some very similar ranges and coastlines if you can tolerate a bit of artistic liberty when looking at the shapes, most of the concerns on reality fade away once in cockpit and navigating unfamiliar terrain.

 

 

 

The discussion on geo-politics always ends in pretty dodgy territory, so I'm avoiding that, but I don't see the fit for a Super Carrier fleet stuck in what amounts to a snowglobe, and the politics on the ground shows how the area is being regarded without such means.

[Bunny Clark]

Sp. politics aside I find it difficult to accept that the US carriers would operated tactically in the Black Sea with any sane chain of command. And I don't accept the PG comparison either, b/c US carriers were not there operating tactically against any of the nations bordering the Gulf. The lessons of Santa Cruz remain valid to this day.:smilewink:

 

That's certainly fair. Really, a lot of it is going to come down to the time period and the scope of the conflict. In the days of the USSR, or facing a major shooting war with post-Soviet Russia, a CVBG probably would not deploy to the Black Sea. If the US were supporting Georgia in a low-grade conflict in Abkhazia in the mid-2000s, it's not inconceivable that it might happen, depending on politics. Even if a low-grade conflict has the potential to escalate with Russia; assuming Ukraine, Bulgaria, Romania, Georgia, and Turkey are all friendly, Russia's scope of operations across the Sea is relatively limited. A carrier could probably operate safely in the western half of the Sea and strike targets in Georgia and Russia.

 

So something like the Cage The Bear campaign for the Tomcat is likely not realistic. But a CVBG may conceivably deploy into the Black Sea for something like the various re-imaginings of the 2008 Russo-Georgian war which forms the basis for a lot of DCS campaigns.