hnair wrote:Moved all posts related to admin action to Forum Feedback Thread
Khalsa, the idea of a "Fleet in being" is being pushed subtly around the net nowadays and that is ok as a cheap-ass tactic. But not here at BRF.
you said it.
Arthur Herbert, 1st Earl of Torrington, originator of the term "fleet in being" in 1690
In naval warfare, a "fleet in being" is a naval force that extends a controlling influence without ever leaving port. Were the fleet to leave port and face the enemy, it might lose in battle and no longer influence the enemy's actions, but while it remains safely in port, the enemy is forced to continually deploy forces to guard against it. A "fleet in being" can be part of a sea denial doctrine, but not one of sea control.
Even more so than other surface vessels in Nazi Germany's Kriegsmarine (navy), the powerful German battleship Tirpitz served her entire career as a "fleet in being" in her own right. Although she never fired a shot at an enemy ship, her mere presence forced the Royal Navy to allocate powerful warships in defending Arctic convoys, and caused a major convoy (PQ-17) to scatter, suffering huge losses, mainly to U-boats and aircraft.
7 LPD ships of san antonio class size and we are yet to see even 2 of them sortie together outside of their harbour for a realistic exercise not the made for photography where lines of white powder bombs erupt and long line of steel jawed "wolf warrior" marines surge out of LSTs to a clean beach with DLSRs all clicking. Yawn....