Couple posts earlier you guys talked about defense of the MOB. Rest assured its going to have AEGIS in this day and age, The Navy would have at least have 5 to 6 Cruiser's stationed with the MOB. Nothing gets through AEGIS. Especially in Flat Blue Water Enviroment. But realistically MOB wouldn't go into operation till at least 2015-20 if it were planned today. No telling what type of Air Defense the US would have then. And US opposers would still be shooting lame French and Russian Air to Surface hardware.

Even if they didn't have those ships present I think aircraft could be launched and recovered from the 1000m long deck(I'm not sure would this need a catapult of Jet/Rocket Assisted Tako-Off?). Having the MOB provide stores and fuel would be a good step to making it more cost-effective and more capable than a conventional Aircraft Carrier. If all else fails you could just have the larger/slower tankers dock on the MOB and trade places when it runs out. The important thing is that it has the capabiity to take on large aircraft like the P-3 Orion which can patrol at LONG range. Thanks! Nate

Would a MOB be able to defend itself (50-cals and CIWS), or would it rely on frigates and destroyers assigned to it, or cruisers floating around at "blue" sea waiting for the word to deploy VLS-launched cruise missiles?

The material I've seen haven't shown much for armament, I would expect it to be similar to an aircraft carrier; ie. CIWS/RAM, 50cal or 25mm chain gun. Because of it's size I would expect it to carry a few more. Depending on how far out to sea it would get placed you might even put some VLS cells on it for TLAM type weapons. If you wanted to spend the money you could also give it AGEIS and SAMs. This process (SAMs and their fire control radar) occasionally gets proposed/tried on carriers. CV's 63,64,and 66 were commissioned with SAM launchers on board (Terrier). Then it gets decided that it is an unnescessary duplication and is cost prohibitive. Then there is the discussion on aircraft eliminating the need for escort vessels that some seem to think is possible. You could argue that you could try to defend a carrier the same way. Never going to happen in the real world for very good reasons, aircraft can't always fly because of weather and other factors. They don't have the endurance of a surface ship, etc. The size of the escort would vary by threat level with a MOB just like with a carrier.

I dont think some of you guys grasp exactly how MOB works. Lets use the version Bechtel group is working on for an example. The actual MOB isnt one single ship. Rather its 3 MODULAR ships which can be configured depending on the mission role. Each ship would be about 300m in length in order so that they are still able to traverse the panama canal. By making the ships modular you can also assign more ships to an objective. AND most importantly you allow for ships to arrive on time faster. Now as to the setting up part. The Bechtel variant uses ships that are end to end and use computers to keep the ships close together at all times in conjunction with interlocking structures at various points. Think of it sort of like a LEGO structure. The design is such that a MOB can be set up in a couple of days just for the linking part and can be ready to receive heavy flight operations within a week or two. Is the idea worthwhile? Yep you betcha. The biggest problem that the MOB project was facing was how to deal with the wave oscillations that would occur and cause the structure to warp. The simplest way was found to make the structure separable and to simply find ways of connecting it when it is needed. Mind you now..theres no way this is going to replace a carrier. Its mobile in the sense that it is a rapidly deployable STRUCTURE..not a mobile CARRIER.

I think that the MOB is a great idea -- I had the idea for something exactly like this independantly, during the build-up to the Iraq war, after thinking about the artificial reefs that were created for the D-Day invasion. (For all I know, people have been having this "original" idea for decades.) And I don't think that defense of the MOB is a particular weakness. Conceptually, I don't think that it is any different that defending any forward base, like our bases in Saudi Arabia during the first Gulf War, etc. You can either give it organic defense systems, or (I think even better and more cost effective) give it a CVBG for protection during wartime operations. It is safe to assume that at least one carrier will be deployed to any major conflict anyway, so just let it's protective umbrella envelope the MOB. To take it a step further, the carrier could sit next to the MOB and offload its air wing. The air wing could operate with increased safety and lower cost from the MOB, and the carrier could be used for combat support, repair and as an air traffic control center. In any case, I can't imagine that a CVN, two AEGIS cruisers, a couple of destroyers, a frigate and two nuclear submarines can't provide adaquate protection for a MOB.

Sounds like Orwell's Floating Fortresses.

I was mention Orwell! Because its such a large clumsy structure, sending it somewhere is a statement of threat that a carrier group cannot mach. Strategically, A carrier is a statement of capability, but it is mobile. so its not a pernament threat. Think the CVBG in Taiwan Strait. Placing a large, inmovable structure in a contested area says We Are Here To Stay. And since it'd be expensive it maintain, its a threat because its been put there for a purpose. Plonking a MOB just off North Korea might be just the trigger for a deal.However, what about subs? Putting a couple of AIDP Subs under the likely route of a MOB or following slightly faster could have unpleasent concequences.

Hell, who needs to build a base? Take a supertanker, strenghten the deck for heli landings and Harrier launches, equip it with a full scale hospital and supply depot and dock and part it somewhere just out of range

After reviewing my sources and some of the replys to my last message. First, a Carrier is designed for SHORT-TERM Operations, THERE IS NO VIABLE WAY to transfer crews from the US and replace them on station and FUEL costs MONEY. Second, the design for the MOB modules had been SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED for INDEPENDENT OPERATION, don't belive me, check out the document by Gene Remmers off the MOBs website at http://mob.nfesc.navy.mil. I challenge people who reply to this message and my previous messages to stand up to the same level of accountablity. Thanks! Nate