----------| Am 24.05.2010 15:59 schrieb Brandon Cope: |---------- > --- On Mon, 5/24/10, Thomas Thrien <[email protected]> wrote: > >> ----------| Am 24.05.2010 15:22 schrieb Brandon Cope: |---------- >> >>> --- On Mon, 5/24/10, Roger Burton West <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> that's still 3-4x the displacement of the subs that'll be hunting them. >>>> >>> Good luck trying to find one or two subs in thePacific ;) >>> >>> I doubt that the size of the ocean really matters if the >>> vessel cannot project its threats over quite large distances. >>> > The I-400 had a range of 37,500 nautical miles miles (1.5 times around the > earth) and the aircraft it carried had a maximum range of over 600 nm. > > A long I-400 has a much better chance of stealthfully approaching a target > than an lone escort carrier on the surface. The disadvantage, of course, if > the limited number of aircraft. > > Brandon > For the strategic command, the nearly 38000 nm range for the sub may be relevant, but for me as the defender of a single installation, I don't care about one outside that 600 nm area (plus some safety, of course) because it cannot attack me until it comes closer. Coming closer means reducing the area I have to search for, or the other way round, I only have to guard that 600-plus nm radius circle.
I confess that this is a quite large area to look for, and a sub - especially a submerged one - can get lost in there quite easily, but it is still a smaller area than the whole Pacific Ocean. But you are right: if the goal is to take out those subs, to hunt them down and not to wait until they will attack you, it might get a real challenge to find them in the Pacific. -- Thomas Thrien Geo 51° 28' 12" N 7° 32' 17" E _______________________________________________ GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]> http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l
