OOC Thread

[Matryoshka]

Quick clarifying query about the current Puget Sound discussion: Poohbah references the Soviet landing-force lacking the manpower to even take Vancouver Island, let alone force a landing at Seattle.
But IIRC, there were pieces and posts by Canadian contributors that put the RCN Pacific Command’s primary base/HQ at Esquimalt (just west of Victoria, on Vancouver Island) in Soviet hands in the early days of the Invasion, after bitter fighting that saw the defenders blow up (most of?) its facilities, mostly right in the faces of the ComBloc advance.

Am I misremembering? Or could the apparent conflict be resolved by saying the early force simply ‘captured’ CFB Esquimalt/the city of Victoria by desant/coup-de-main, but left securing the rest of the island until they could receive follow-on forces (namely, the forces destroyed at Puget Sound)?

[Canman_v3]

IIRC, there were two battles of Vancouver. Seems it would be difficult to stage something like that without CFB Esquimalt or some other staging point (Comox?) falling.

[Matryoshka]

IIRC, there were two battles of Vancouver. Seems it would be difficult to stage something like that without CFB Esquimalt or some other staging point (Comox?) falling.

Two major battles punctuating a protracted siege, no less. Unfortunately, with so many of the major contributors’ viewpoint characters serving their wartime careers in the US on the southern front, the campaign in the northern theatre has always suffered from a certain lack of focus and proper detail/framework. Checking a couple of ‘timeline’ threads I have saved from previous iterations of the forum yields some quasi-contradictory posts:

From an OOC ‘compiled timeline’ post by Matt Wiser:

[XX] June 1986: Battle of Vancouver begins.
[...]
18 July 1986: Battle of Puget Sound (aka the Seattle amphib). Soviet amphibious force attempting to outflank Vancouver's defenders is destroyed.
[...]
3 Feburary 1987: Battle of Vancouver ends. 95,000 Soviet troops surrender to Canadian and U.S. forces. Two divisions that tried to break out are wiped out almost to a man.

And a couple of additions by Bernard Woolley:

Operation GRANBY
Codename given to drop by 5th (UK) Airborne Brigade and II Squadron, RAF Regiment on Vancouver IAP in 1987. Intelligence on Soviet defenders was incorrect leading to heavy casualties on the British side.

Operation GRAPLE
Anglo-Canadian operation to link up heavy armoured and mechanised forces with those used in [GRANBY]. Involved Canadian 4th Armoured Division and the British 7th and 11th Armoured Divisions, and the 16th Airportable Division.
The 4th Canadian Armoured Division was temporarily under the command of II (UK) Corps and would eventually serve as part of 21st Army Group in IV (UK) Corps.

Operation BATTLEAXE
Anglo-Canadian operation by I (UK) Corps (1st, 3rd 4th Armoured Divisions) and III (Can) Corps (3rd 5th Armoured Divisions and 6th Mech Division) to outflank Soviet forces in Vancouver by wide [manoeuvre] to the north, cutting them off from other Soviet forces in Canada. Was considered to be the most [successful] part of the Anglo-Canadian efforts to liberate Vancouver.

The reference to Vancouver is a little confusing. Are we talking 1st Vancouver at the tail end of '86, begining of '87, or 2nd Vancouver in late '87 early '88? It wasn't a continuous campaign as the city was quite far behind enemy lines for much of 1986 and most of 1987. The begining of 1st Vancouver is usually marked in late May when the encirclement of the city was complete.

Operation ANACONDA was the initial part of the mission to liberate Vancouver. Canadian and British troops did not advance as far as was hoped but they did get close enough to make Operations GRANBY (the airborne drop on Vancouver IAP) and GRAPLE (the ground-link up) possible. The day before GRANBY/GRAPLE was launched Operation BATTLEAXE, the big armoured sweep to the north to outflank the city and cut off its defenders from the rest of Soviet forces in Canada.
BATTLEAXE drew off a lot of forces that could have defended against GRANBY/GRAPLE.

BATTLEAXE was very sucessful, the 5 armoured (3 UK, 2 Can) and 1 mechanised division (Canadian), cut a swathe through Soviet defences and tore an entire front to pieces. GRANBY/GRAPLE was eventually sucessful but at a huge cost, the airborne forces were cut to shreds before they were relieved and GRAPLE went on for a month longer than planned, sucking in troops from all over Western Canada. Almost every British and Canadian formation sent a contingent to Vancouver at one time or another. Because of the drain of Anglo-Canadian troops the US send the 25th ID and 3rd MarDiv to cover gaps, though no US troops fought within Vancouver.

The progress, or lack of it, during 2nd Vancouver was why there were no serious plans to liberate the rest of BC and go on into Alaska until 1989 when they were overtaken by events.

Confusion like this is basically inevitable in such a long-running* multi-author project — not helped by the entire scenario’s inherent implausibility needing multiple massive doses of author fiat to make it ‘possible’ at all†! — and multiple board-resets have further clouded the issue of what is and is not ‘canon’. I have some older threads saved as .html files, and FWIW I’ve e-mailed copies thereof to Matt Wiser (who seems to be the lead editor now‡), so hopefully they’ll help iron out the kinks.

* Remember, this all exploded out of a simple DBWI Matt Wiser started on alternatehistory.com back in 2009!
† Especially in light of what was known at the movie’s time-of-release in 1986, and what has been revealed in the intervening four decades(!), about Soviet/ComBloc capabilities, limitations, and fundamental systemic shortcomings. Not to mention the terrain issues and simple non-existence of the requisite roads and infrastructure in Alaska/Canada to permit anything like the movie’s assumed ‘lightning Soviet advance’ across the Bering Strait and down into the Central Northern US.
‡ As noted re: multi-writer projects, contributions by Bernard Woolley/Stuart Slade (before his passing) did carry a lot of weight, but didn’t always ‘match the edges’ of others’.

[Poohbah]

I'm assuming that defensive lines on Vancouver Island were well north of the Strait. Even if they held the entire island, the Americans still held the Kitsap Peninsula.

[Kendog52361]

I was browsing over on SpaceBattles, and in response to a question in the "War Room Questions Thread", there was a link to the missile loadouts from first commissioning (of the non-VLS ships) through about 2018, of both the Ticonderoga-class and the Arleigh Burke-class ships.

I then found, at the bottom, one of the "keywords", of "missile loadout", which goes to all of the articles of missile loadouts, ranging from numerous US and foreign ships, including options like the Long Beach, the Cruiser Conversions, and so on. I'm posting this here, because it looks like a helpful resource for the various options of what the US Navy is carrying, in terms of missiles aboard it's ships, whether it's in the Red Dawn-verse or The Last War-verse.

The first link below is for the Ticonderoga-class, the second is for the Arleigh Burke-class, and the third is the other articles about "missile loadouts".

https://influenceofhistory.blogspot.com ... -1983.html

https://influenceofhistory.blogspot.com ... -2018.html

https://influenceofhistory.blogspot.com ... 20Loadouts

[Wolfman]

Matt, how did the Navy and the Marines keep up with their Phantom losses? Did Mitsubishi start up a line for the F-4S?

[clancyphile]

I was browsing over on SpaceBattles, and in response to a question in the "War Room Questions Thread", there was a link to the missile loadouts from first commissioning (of the non-VLS ships) through about 2018, of both the Ticonderoga-class and the Arleigh Burke-class ships.

I then found, at the bottom, one of the "keywords", of "missile loadout", which goes to all of the articles of missile loadouts, ranging from numerous US and foreign ships, including options like the Long Beach, the Cruiser Conversions, and so on. I'm posting this here, because it looks like a helpful resource for the various options of what the US Navy is carrying, in terms of missiles aboard it's ships, whether it's in the Red Dawn-verse or The Last War-verse.

The first link below is for the Ticonderoga-class, the second is for the Arleigh Burke-class, and the third is the other articles about "missile loadouts".

https://influenceofhistory.blogspot.com ... -1983.html

https://influenceofhistory.blogspot.com ... -2018.html

https://influenceofhistory.blogspot.com ... 20Loadouts

Very fascinating details. I did something similar for ships in the Strike Group Reagan universe.

Here's what a VLS Tico routinely carries in the SGR-verse:
80 RIM-156A (to RIM-174B)*
16 BGM-109C
8 BGM-109D
16 RIM-161
32 RIM-162
8 RGM-84
* = In The SGRverse, the RIM-174A is a SM-2MR with an active seeker, while the RIM-174B is a SM-2ER with an active seeker.

A fascinating comparison.

[Matt Wiser]

Matt, how did the Navy and the Marines keep up with their Phantom losses? Did Mitsubishi start up a line for the F-4S?

Mitsubishi didn't start up a line: the noses for the RF-4Cs they built actually came from St. Louis, but the rest were built in-country. As for the N/S losses? Those were made up almost exclusively from AMARC via NADEP North Island. Some squadrons, of course, gave up their Phantoms for Hornets as things went on.

[Wolfman]

I thought we had units with the RF-4B/C reequipping on the RF-4EJ…

Anyways, depending on how many squadrons we have using the F-4S, we have a small pool of replacement aircraft due to the fact that only 302 were converted from F-4J IRL…

[Lordroel]

Matt Wiser, notice you are also in the T2000 Fanzine- You're On Your Own No. 6.

[Matt Wiser]

Matt Wiser, notice you are also in the T2000 Fanzine- You're On Your Own No. 6.

Thanks! I've also provided stuff for the previous five fanzine issues as well.

[Wolfman]

With regards to the Essex-class carriers and female personnel, Lexington used what had been air wing junior officers’ bunking in the fo’c’sle while she was an AVT, so I imagine that a lot of her facilities (and on her sister ships) would be unisex (and in the case of the showers, there’d be a schedule for who uses them first on a given day) while berthing would be on a compartment by compartment basis for the enlisted and female officers would have roommates of the same gender in the officer’s staterooms… am I making sense here?

[Poohbah]

With regards to the Essex-class carriers and female personnel, Lexington used what had been air wing junior officers’ bunking in the fo’c’sle while she was an AVT, so I imagine that a lot of her facilities (and on her sister ships) would be unisex (and in the case of the showers, there’d be a schedule for who uses them first on a given day) while berthing would be on a compartment by compartment basis for the enlisted and female officers would have roommates of the same gender in the officer’s staterooms… am I making sense here?

The female mods are not too major, and showers/heads are generally adjacent to berthing spaces. Officer berthing would require shower schedules, not so much enlisted. They'd probably manage personnel assignments by blocks of female sailors (one berthing compartment at a time), so you'd get an entire block of 60 female sailors arriving at one time for ship's company, same with the air wing (juggle bodies as they arrive from NAMTRAGRUDET).

[Wolfman]

Now I’m thinking along the lines of the heads and showers aboard the Battlestar Galactica, the ‘03 version…

[Matryoshka]

Now I’m thinking along the lines of the heads and showers aboard the Battlestar Galactica, the ‘03 version…

If sensibilities were more evolved and the US Navy could trust more young sailors not to be sniggering gawking juvenile knuckleheads about seeing a fellow sailor’s headlights or rear bumper, that might work, but honestly, I think it’s going to be a long time before naval culture — especially one based in American mores — ever reaches that degree of maturity.

[Wolfman]

Hence the schedule for the showers, the heads are whenever you need them…

[Matt Wiser]

Now I’m thinking along the lines of the heads and showers aboard the Battlestar Galactica, the ‘03 version…

If sensibilities were more evolved and the US Navy could trust more young sailors not to be sniggering gawking juvenile knuckleheads about seeing a fellow sailor’s headlights or rear bumper, that might work, but honestly, I think it’s going to be a long time before naval culture — especially one based in American mores — ever reaches that degree of maturity.

Not going to dispute that analysis. If you remember the shreiks from social conservatives about even letting women aboard warships, they'd be screaming bloody murder at this one.

[jemhouston]

Got a question about the US currency captured during the invasion. Even if the Federal Reserve Banks moved or destroyed the money they had, the Soviets still got the money in every bank in occupied territory.

They would have been able to either ship it back to the Russia or take it to Mexico, then to Latin America and deposit it in neutral countries.

If I remember right, the US marked the currency used in Hawaii so if Hawaii was occupied, they could disavow the currency.
What if anything could the US do to neutralize the money.
The Federal Reserve banks are probably 11th Dallas, 10th Kanas City, 9th Minneapolis, and 8th St. Louis.

[Poohbah]

Got a question about the US currency captured during the invasion. Even if the Federal Reserve Banks moved or destroyed the money they had, the Soviets still got the money in every bank in occupied territory.

They would have been able to either ship it back to the Russia or take it to Mexico, then to Latin America and deposit it in neutral countries.

If I remember right, the US marked the currency used in Hawaii so if Hawaii was occupied, they could disavow the currency.
What if anything could the US do to neutralize the money.
The Federal Reserve banks are probably 11th Dallas, 10th Kanas City, 9th Minneapolis, and 8th St. Louis.

The Federal Reserve and the Department of the Treasury were some of the most prepared organizations for Der Tag.

There was an order to burn currency in danger of capture issued on Day One, and scrip was getting issued by D+15 within 100 miles of the FLOT. They got SOME currency, but not as much as anyone predicted (or that they hoped).

Also, Treasury had their act together for tracking currency movements. They also had a team supporting JSOC, make of that what you will. Worth noting that there were about a dozen truly spectacular bank robberies around the world during the war, and all of them remain unsolved.

[Johnnie Lyle]

Got a question about the US currency captured during the invasion. Even if the Federal Reserve Banks moved or destroyed the money they had, the Soviets still got the money in every bank in occupied territory.

They would have been able to either ship it back to the Russia or take it to Mexico, then to Latin America and deposit it in neutral countries.

If I remember right, the US marked the currency used in Hawaii so if Hawaii was occupied, they could disavow the currency.
What if anything could the US do to neutralize the money.
The Federal Reserve banks are probably 11th Dallas, 10th Kanas City, 9th Minneapolis, and 8th St. Louis.

The Federal Reserve and the Department of the Treasury were some of the most prepared organizations for Der Tag.

There was an order to burn currency in danger of capture issued on Day One, and scrip was getting issued by D+15 within 100 miles of the FLOT. They got SOME currency, but not as much as anyone predicted (or that they hoped).

Also, Treasury had their act together for tracking currency movements. They also had a team supporting JSOC, make of that what you will. Worth noting that there were about a dozen truly spectacular bank robberies around the world during the war, and all of them remain unsolved.

I assume they were also attacking occupation and Red money supplies?