This is coolbert:
Brazil si, Turkey no!
Bird Farm = Aircraft carrier.
From Harry at Sharkhunters:
"BRITISH BIRD FARM SOLD TO BRAZIL –"
"Rumors are now official; the Royal Navy [RN] carrier HMS OCEAN (a helicopter carrier) has been sold to the Brazilian Navy. It has been rumored for some time that this deal was being considered, but it is confirmed that Brazil will pay €84 million (Euros) for this ship. The first Brazilian Navy officers will be headed for England shortly when HMS OCEAN finishes her time with the RN this October or November"
Turkey also reported to have been interested in purchasing HMS Ocean. This deal to the Turk fell through somehow.
HMS Ocean a helicopter carrier. A light carrier. The ship as sold not complete without a complement of warplanes, rotary, tilt-rotor or fixed wing, the latter if possible capable of vertical-take-off and landing.
Tuesday, January 16, 2018
Back to the topic, general officers of World War One. The contrast as is the subject of this post could not be more striking!!
Consider these two senior military commanders from that era of the Great War as possible additions to LISTS as were the subject of prior blog entries.
1. "Ten Most Underrated generals." Add to that list the name of Svetozar Boroević.
"K.u.k. Feldmarschall Svetozar Boroević . . . was an Austro-Hungarian field marshal who was described as one of the finest defensive strategists of the First World War.
With all respect consider defense to be the stronger form of combat. Easier to do and accomplish more with less!
K.u.k. = "The joint 'Imperial and Royal Army' (kaiserlich und königliche Armee or k.u.k.)"
2. "Ten Worst Generals." Add to that list the name of Luigi Cardona.
Marshal of Italy Luigi Cadorna . . . was an Italian General and Marshal of Italy, most famous for being the Chief of Staff of the Italian Army during the first part of World War I.
Historians record Cadorna as an unimaginative martinet who was ruthless with his troops and dismissive of his country's political authorities. David Stevenson, Professor of International History at the London School of Economics, describes him as earning 'opprobrium as one of the most callous and incompetent of First World War commanders.'"
"opprobrium - - n. Disgrace arising from exceedingly shameful conduct; ignominy. n. Scornful reproach. A cause of shame or disgrace."
"martinet - - noun 1. a strict disciplinarian, especially a military one. 2. someone who stubbornly adheres to methods or rules."
It doesn't get much worse than that. And that too during a time of war when most all the senior commanders seemed to be rather incompetent or downright acknowledged as being so.
The good, the bad, and no ugly!
YET one more senior officer from the era of the Great War given short shrift in the history books. A man who cannot be neglected however.
"short shrift - - noun - - rapid and unsympathetic dismissal; curt treatment."
Before there was Bruchmuller, Hutier and Ludendorff there was Brusilov!
Alexei Brusilov. Senior Imperial Russian general officer during World War One. The most [?] successful Russian commander of that conflict!
Brusilov the senior Russian commander during what has been deemed The Brusilov Offensive!
"The Brusilov Offensive . . . as the Russian Empire's greatest feat of arms during World War I, and among the most lethal offensives in world history."
As to strategy, tactics and the operational art "those "main ideas" of Brusilov to include:
* "To increase the points of sally"
* "To make the width of attack wide"
* "To limit the duration of bombardment"
* "To advance artillery in secrecy and to cooperate with the infantry."
* "To advance the strategic reserve beforehand and to join with the storm-troops after a breach of the enemy's front trench has been achieved."
* "To get the trench lines as close as possible to the enemy's trenches prior to the battle."
Brusilov incorporating into his offensive plan a variety of stratagem, tactics and techniques of the operational art as having been proposed earlier by others. Brusilov his contribution the TOTAL PACKAGE of such methods as to be later emulated by others.
“Clausewitz also considered a commander in chief to be a military leader without the additional word 'supreme'; for us, the chief of the General Staff is considered a strategist and commander in chief who is only part of the leadership in war.” — B. Shaposhnikov, Mozg Armii"
Brains of the Army! Mozg Armii!
The Chief of Staff [CoS] as the supreme head of the military but only a part of the whole and recognizing his role to be so.
According to Shaposhnikov that epitome of the CoS Count Franz Conrad von Hötzendorf of the Austro-Hungarian army in that period prior to the Great War of 1914!
"For Shaposhnikov . . . the main and ideal model for such an 'integral' General Staff was that of the Austro-Hungarian Empire during World War I, and specifically, the staff of Count Franz Conrad von Hötzendorf (the Austro-Hungarian Army's Chief of the General Staff from 1914 to 1916)."
"According to Shaposhnikov, the cardinal virtue of Conrad was that under him, there was a real teamwork among the General Staff. Shaposhnikov praised Conrad's close relations with his operations chief; he also commended Conrad on his encouraging his subordinates to show initiative, his view of strategy as being subordinated to politics . . . and his lack of reluctance in delegating authority."
"Shaposhnikov also attributed a range of personal virtues to Conrad, among which 'boldness and strength of character', 'energy and initiative', 'independence', and his workaholism"
"The effective commander of the Austro-Hungarian army, Field Marshal Conrad von Hotzendorf, was probably the most respected military leader of his day, referred to as the greatest strategist in central Europe and was held in very high esteem even by the Germans."
The performance of the Austro-Hungarian army during the Great War generally seen as poor? NOT however because of Conrad? Factors beyond control of the man rather contributing to a combat performance inadequate by reasonable and accepted measured standard! Probably so!
Monday, January 15, 2018
Once more and concluding with yet another listing. Commando raids special operations units in action.
Again who has compiled this list I am not sure. Thanks to the video at You Tube.
Ten different military experts and historians and you would get ten different answers? I suspect that is so.
"Top 10 Commando Raids"
"These are the top commando raids of all time. These commando raids were undertaken by the best commandos and best special forces in the world!"
# 10. Moscow Theater Siege. Russians.
# 9. The raid to kill Osama Bin Laden. American, GWOT.
# 8. Great Locomotive Chase. Union, American Civil War.
# 7. Fort Eben-Emael Raid. German, WW2.
# 6. The Siege of Edinburgh Castle.
# 5. The Gran Sasso Raid. Germans, WW2.
# 4. Operation Frankton. British, WW2.
# 3. Raid at Cabanatuan. American, WW2.
# 2. Operation Entebbe. Israeli, GWOT.
# 1. The St. Nazaire Raid. British, WW2.
PERHAPS THE GREATEST RAID OF THEM ALL OMITTED? THE TROJAN HORSE!
Churchill having stated that Frankton of itself shortened the war by six months!! As to this conclusion there is no elaboration.
"The best laid plans of mice and men"!!
From a You Tube Internet web site an item of interest with a military dimension. Ten again! Military plans and operations that did not come to fruition.
"Top 10 Scrapped War Plans"
A list as compiled by whom exactly I am not sure.
"These are the top 10 scrapped and abandoned war plans of history. It's safe to say if any of these plans were executed history would have been radically different."
# 10. Operation Plan 3 German invasion of the United States.
# 9. Soviet Invasion of Europe 1964.
# 8. Plan 17. French invasion of Germany.
# 7. Tannenbaum German/Italian invasion of Switzerland.
# 6. War Plan Red American invasion of Canada.
# 5. Defense Scheme 1. Canadian invasion of the United States.
# 4. Sealion. German invasion of England.
# 3. Operation Pike British/French aerial bombardment of the Soviet Union.
# 2. Downfall. Allied invasion of Japan.
# 1. Unthinkable. British war with the Soviet Union.
An American invasion of Canada always predicated on the assumption of their being a possibility of war between Great Britain and the United States. England and the U.S. unto the time just prior to the Great War often at odds, adversaries thankfully without having to resort to armed hostilities!!
Pike strictly confined to air attack by bomber formations only? Destroy the oil fields of the Soviet Union, vicinity Baku, Azerbaijan, Caspian Sea.
Sunday, January 14, 2018
NO option for sail and wind power however!
Conclusion! The big-gun, big-warship concept again.
Thanks again to Deviant Art for the image.
The "big ship" concept once more. A surface warship that can "dish it out" all the while absorbing a lot of damage but continuing to fight!
"dish it out - - to administer punishment, injury, abuse, etc. #punishment #abuse #pain #suffering #damage"
A variety of organic combat weapons systems the mission of which to include ship-to ship encounters, shore bombardment, anti-submarine warfare, air-defense.
AS WITH THE MODIFIED FOR MILITARY-PURPOSES SUPER-TANKER BUT SPECIFICALLY HERE AGAIN A HEAVILY MODIFIED MERCHANT VESSEL OF CONTAINER-CARRYING SIZE. IN ALL CASES USING OFF-THE-SHELF SYSTEMS AND COMPONENTS!
Weaponry to include:
* 155 mm Archer artillery. Twelve guns total.
* HIMARS rocket artillery system. Twelve firing units total.
* Mark 41 Vertical Launch System [VLS]. Multiple units.
* Mark 32 torpedo launcher. Six launchers total.
Additionally: * Drones. * NO organic combat warplane capacity. * A platform however for the landing and take-off of rotary or tilt-rotor aircraft. * No organic troop complement [MEU], shore-landing or ground-assault not an option.
Also including: * Redundancy of control and propulsion systems. * Armor protection in critical areas. * An interior with a void-filling three-dimensional lattice-work to which are welded sealed and water-tight shipping containers providing for relative unsinkable invulnerability! [once more relative the key word within context]
A MODERN BATTLESHIP OF THIS TYPE FOR SEA-POWER, NAVAL SURFACE-WARFARE, SUPERIORITY/SUPREMACY IS A POSSIBLE AND NOW?
But can it fly?
I do not claim to be a naval architect, a naval expert or even a military expert. This is all just one man and his opinion! Comments anyone?