This paper will show, through historical analogy, that the official Navy position is correct. That is, that large aircraft carriers, capable of destroying the Soviet fleet in home waters, provide the most effective aid to the ground campaign in Europe. Specifically, this paper will use as an example the contributions sea power made to a major land war to show that aggressive strikes against an enemy fleet will bring about more favorable results to the land campaign than would an escort navy. This does not deny, however, that the Navy should also have an escort capability. On the contrary, supplies crossing the ocean during a war must be protected to ensure effective materiel support of allied forces in Europe. The question this paper answer is whether the U.S. Navy should focus on destruction of the enemy's fleet, or protection of shipping, as its primary objective. (fr)


    Access

    Access via TIB

    Check availability in my library


    Export, share and cite



    Title :

    U.S. Navy Strategy: Offensive Strike or Escort


    Contributors:

    Publication date :

    1989


    Size :

    24 pages


    Type of media :

    Report


    Type of material :

    No indication


    Language :

    English




    Ford Escort - a " defensive " project strategy

    Perini,G. / Ford Motor,GB | Automotive engineering | 1991



    Escort tugs

    Online Contents | 1994


    Ford Escort

    Online Contents | 1994


    Wer bremst den Escort? Bremsprobleme beim Ford Escort

    Deger,C. / Ford-Werke,Koeln,DE | Automotive engineering | 1995