3,910
edits
Talk:National Army Naval Forces (Faneria): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Talk:National Army Naval Forces (Faneria) (view source)
Revision as of 05:15, 10 April 2022
, 10 April 2022threw out old lore, moved infobox to main page. will be used for planning out list of active ships.
m (threw out old lore, moved infobox to main page. will be used for planning out list of active ships.) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Going into the second quarter of the century, the composition of the Army naval service is changing as older, larger warships become slightly less prominent compared to a larger force of smaller surface combatants. While the light support carrier doctrine employed by the Army remains a key point in Fhainnin strategy within the Vandarch Sea and in its littoral waters along the open ocean, budget cuts and the lack of a serious neighboring rival make lobbying for a larger navy a weak political position. Currently, the Army plans to phase out much of its older surface fleet in favor of modern designs. While the total number of heavy surface combatants will drop, a larger array of small vessels is planned. Forays into missile boats in particular are in vogue for white-water operations, though the overall trend in modern naval design is a greater integration of air assets with naval ones, as evidenced by the fact that the vast majority of new designs take landing pads into account compared to older Fhainnin designs, many of which lagged behind in this area. | Going into the second quarter of the century, the composition of the Army naval service is changing as older, larger warships become slightly less prominent compared to a larger force of smaller surface combatants. While the light support carrier doctrine employed by the Army remains a key point in Fhainnin strategy within the Vandarch Sea and in its littoral waters along the open ocean, budget cuts and the lack of a serious neighboring rival make lobbying for a larger navy a weak political position. Currently, the Army plans to phase out much of its older surface fleet in favor of modern designs. While the total number of heavy surface combatants will drop, a larger array of small vessels is planned. Forays into missile boats in particular are in vogue for white-water operations, though the overall trend in modern naval design is a greater integration of air assets with naval ones, as evidenced by the fact that the vast majority of new designs take landing pads into account compared to older Fhainnin designs, many of which lagged behind in this area. | ||
| Line 103: | Line 8: | ||
Technologically, a majority of the fleet is second-line, or constructed between 1980 and 2010, with roughly fifteen percent of its ships being newer and another ten percent or so being constructed prior to 1980. This ageing has made for a considerable cost in maintenance and refits to keep the fleet operational. The main symptom of this was the production of smaller missile boats meant for mass production in the 1970's, bloating the fleet with over fifty light vessels in line with the posturing the navy preferred. In 2012, policy was changed to reflect a growing budget and need to maintain a technological edge rather than rely on dated equipment, demanding that naval production focus on role-dedicated destroyers and air power over the previous cruiser-centered model, along with the discontinuation of later missile boat programs and reforms in the design and planning process. | Technologically, a majority of the fleet is second-line, or constructed between 1980 and 2010, with roughly fifteen percent of its ships being newer and another ten percent or so being constructed prior to 1980. This ageing has made for a considerable cost in maintenance and refits to keep the fleet operational. The main symptom of this was the production of smaller missile boats meant for mass production in the 1970's, bloating the fleet with over fifty light vessels in line with the posturing the navy preferred. In 2012, policy was changed to reflect a growing budget and need to maintain a technological edge rather than rely on dated equipment, demanding that naval production focus on role-dedicated destroyers and air power over the previous cruiser-centered model, along with the discontinuation of later missile boat programs and reforms in the design and planning process. | ||
*{{wp|Novara-class cruiser}} | *{{wp|Novara-class cruiser}} | ||
| Line 446: | Line 347: | ||
| | | | ||
|} | |} | ||