Well, Our CLOSEST Allies are Japan, Great Britain, Russia, Australia, and NZ. Does anyone know what they allow?
Japan doesn't, Australia is a major player in the non-proliferation movements and New Zealand and the USN haven't been on speaking terms for a couple of decades for the same reason.
I don't know about Great Britain.
Russia is irrelevant since with the allies you have, you won't get them on the boat.
The only reason why IoT would have build a navy like you envision in the first place is because they were involved fairly deeply in the Cold War, and since all your allies are "Western" countries and all your systems are American...
Well, you figure it out.
We didnt like the Cold War. We kept ties with Russia and America, and built our fleet up with them. America shared tech with us because they wanted us to side with them, which we did.
The only way you would ever get the US to share top of the line military equipment is if you were part of a military alliance
against the Soviets.
We have never had grudges against Russia, and they never hated us.
Why the feck wouldn't they? You were actively reinforcing their enemy. And even if you don't have any grudges, they certainly will.
The only reason our fleet is so big is because of ships leftover from the Cold War,
Which is exactly what I said. And again, that means no Rusky ally.
that are still serving today, some with 40 years under their belt. We have no intention of scrapping them anytime soon, and when we do, we will try to replace them on a 1 to 1 or 2 to 1 basis, nuclear or non, depending on the role. Our FW Carrier, built in 1995, will be in service until 2045-2075, depending on the funds that can be set aside for upkeep. The McKinney Class, built in 1965, will hopefully be in service until 2035, but because of problems with the itegrity of the structure, it may see its last deployment in 2015. Our CGNs, DDGNs, and FFGNs are hopefully going to be in service until the FW Carrier is decommisioned, putting nearly over 100 years of service on them (built 1965-1975).
There is absolutely no way to get that much service life out of a military ship, and even if there were, they'd be so obsolete that they'd be worse than useless. And no, you can't keep upgrading them forever.
Look back a hundred years and see just how much naval warfare has changed.
We swithched to conventional power for single and fleet roles in the 1980s and that has been our standard. Our ships have been gradually downsized from 800 to 500 feet, due to the smaller size of turbines, but our weapons payload have been decreased. We want to build one more carrier in 2015 to replace or work alongside the McKinney until its retirement in 2035. The same goes with some of the Nuclear Warships. As I said before, we want our Carrier Strike Fleets to not have to worry about refueling in the middle of the ocean.
Actually you still will. Maybe not fuel for the ships, but your aircraft still need fuel, and your ships still needs lube oil.
And then there's the matter of provisions and spares. Chances are you won't be able to carry enough for a full deployment.
(Quick note. Our 2 Carrier Strike Groups are used to complement the USNs 12 Battle Groups.)
Another reason why the Russians wouldn't want to play.
_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error
Worklist
Source Materiel is always welcome.