|Archive through January 03, 2008||25||01/04 08:07am|
|Archive through January 07, 2008||25||01/07 11:40pm|
|By Michael C. Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Monday, January 07, 2008 - 03:49 pm: Edit|
As I understand it, the F14s are on the BIG DEAL carriers and are only committed to the most important battles.
And given the importance of those battles, they close with their gatlings. With all the losses that entails.
If you only have 1 CVA and 1 CVB plus another F14 carrier (DVL, BCV) PER FRONT, you won't be letting them sit idle or risked in minor engagements.
FOr example, both the Nimitz and Napolean met their end (well Nimitz came back eventually) in Cavalry and Remus. From PF attacks...
|By Gary Bear (Gunner) on Monday, January 07, 2008 - 04:09 pm: Edit|
And the damage dealt to NIMITZ and MACARTHUR (you said "NIMITZ", but it was "Big Mac" that docked with Remus) was by units pushing the attack on them. Not that their fighters were closing to engage.
|By Michael C. Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Monday, January 07, 2008 - 04:47 pm: Edit|
1) Change Napolean to McArthur. OOPS. Nimitz got schwanked in Cavalry (vs IKV Vindicator, IIRC), Mac at Remus.
2) The point I was trying to make is that these are THEATER level strategic platforms and thus they are only part of the major actions. Skirmishes are left to the "lesser" carriers.
|By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Monday, January 07, 2008 - 11:28 pm: Edit|
I did not propse a "conjectural" ship, but an unbuilt design like the NDD. The class profile in CL# 9 indicates the CVS was built with small bays that were limited to F-18s. (R2.29) says the CVS never operated F-14s. So I am not proposing that a CVS could operate F-14s.
I am suggested as a back story that The Feds did design work to operate F-14s from an SC3 carrier. Once the BCH was developed the BCV would be superior to any CB based strike carrier. The first BCV was built as a replacement for the CVA MacArthur (R2.74).
So the Feds decide to build a new fast raiding carrier. No more DNLs were converted and the CVF can only operate F-18s. A CVX developed from the unbuilt CBV would be a way forward.
|By Mike West (Mjwest) on Monday, January 07, 2008 - 11:40 pm: Edit|
OK, I stated it wrong.
I am saying that the unbuilt design could have been an unbuilt variant of the CVS/CVB that *could* carry F-14s.
The CVS historically could not carry F-14s. That doesn't mean it could not have been designed to from the start.
So, the CVS could still be the unbuilt design.
|By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Tuesday, January 08, 2008 - 12:06 am: Edit|
That works for me. As far as the center warp, like on the CB, it could have been a planned improvenment rather than a fleet wide refit for CAs. The building of the BCV and advent of X-ships would make this design obsolete.
|By Trent Telenko (Ttelenko) on Thursday, January 10, 2008 - 09:43 am: Edit|
In F&E players simply replace the CVF with a new CVF. There is a limit of no more than one in service ayt any one time, but existing CVS can be converted to fast carriers.
Now that the F101 has arrived in the F&E game system. They would not put F-14 on a CVF. They would ugrade the the CVF with F101s and avoid the issues of F14 replacment.
|Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only|
Administer Page | Delete Conversation | Close Conversation | Move Conversation