A Floating Fortress (as in Orwell's 1984)

[James G]

(Not sure if this is best suited here or elsewhere lordroel )

There is mention made in the novel 1984 of a 'floating fortress' operated by the Oceania Navy. It is one of several in service with this one anchored between the Faroes and Iceland IIRC.
There is no more information given.
I have a concept in my head about it. It is towed into place rather than steaming there under its own power. Guns and missiles aplenty, maybe a well-deck or several present. The maindeck is one giant aircraft carrier platform with multiple runways going in all directions, maybe even able to rotate to get the wind better. Huge crew, most doing menial work which could be best done by automated machines yet done by sailors as Oceania wants that as per its ideology of mass military service.
Unsinkable, unless hit by a nuke, the huge beast of a naval platform just sits there able to dominate any possible fight short of a nuclear one for the sea-lanes.

Is this all madness on my part?  

[lordroel]

Mar 1, 2021 18:49:35 GMT James G said:

(Not sure if this is best suited here or elsewhere lordroel )

There is mention made in the novel 1984 of a 'floating fortress' operated by the Oceania Navy. It is one of several in service with this one anchored between the Faroes and Iceland IIRC.
There is no more information given.
I have a concept in my head about it. It is towed into place rather than steaming there under its own power. Guns and missiles aplenty, maybe a well-deck or several present. The maindeck is one giant aircraft carrier platform with multiple runways going in all directions, maybe even able to rotate to get the wind better. Huge crew, most doing menial work which could be best done by automated machines yet done by sailors as Oceania wants that as per its ideology of mass military service.
Unsinkable, unless hit by a nuke, the huge beast of a naval platform just sits there able to dominate any possible fight short of a nuclear one for the sea-lanes.

Is this all madness on my part?  

No problem James G , thread is in the right place.

I always toughed of a Floating Fortress of being something like two battleships formed into a catamaran type of ship. 

[simon darkshade]

You’re not the first chap to think about it.

The concept of the SeaBase is close to some aspects of it.

[oscssw]

Mar 1, 2021 18:49:35 GMT James G said:

(Not sure if this is best suited here or elsewhere lordroel )

There is mention made in the novel 1984 of a 'floating fortress' operated by the Oceania Navy. It is one of several in service with this one anchored between the Faroes and Iceland IIRC.
There is no more information given.
I have a concept in my head about it. It is towed into place rather than steaming there under its own power. Guns and missiles aplenty, maybe a well-deck or several present. The maindeck is one giant aircraft carrier platform with multiple runways going in all directions, maybe even able to rotate to get the wind better. Huge crew, most doing menial work which could be best done by automated machines yet done by sailors as Oceania wants that as per its ideology of mass military service.
Unsinkable, unless hit by a nuke, the huge beast of a naval platform just sits there able to dominate any possible fight short of a nuclear one for the sea-lanes.

Is this all madness on my part?  

IMNSHO, Yes it is. 

in 1984 we had nuke subs with big torpedoes; MK 48 carried 1000 Lb conventional Warheads and the Russians had even bigger ones.  This is a sitting duck.  Come in deep below the layer.  Launch a full spread at a known location.  Bye, Bye Floating fortress.

“Fixed fortifications are a monument to the stupidity of man. Anything built by man, can be destroyed by him.” Georgie Patton.

[simon darkshade]

In @, it would certainly run into issues as said. In the world of 1984, there is no mention of nuclear submarines and Orwell's postulated future seems to have stood still around the technological point of the late 1940s.

To make it survivable in a modern setting, it needs to have defensive and offensive capacity, as well as serving at the centre of a battlegroup.

[belushitd]

I've always thought that if one placed a metal shell around an anchored floating base, say, offset 50 to 100 feet, it would mitigate the effects of torpedoes by having them hit the metal shell rather than the actual hull. Don't empty the space between the shell and the actual hull, leave it a water buffer. Keep the explosion and the gas bobble/water jet sufficiently far away that the hull would be relatively safe. If we're talking a floating fortress that has no need for mobility, all you need to do is add more boyancy to account for the weight of the metal. Might not even have to be thick metal, just enough to set off the fuse on the torpedo, or to stop the torpedo in its tracks.

Belushi TD

EDIT - P.S. I just realized this thread is over 90 days old. I apologize for thread necromancy. 

[lordroel]

Jul 9, 2021 16:30:05 GMT belushitd said:

I

EDIT - P.S. I just realized this thread is over 90 days old. I apologize for thread necromancy. 

No problem, it’s okay.

[simon darkshade]

Another version of that type of idea could be an updated anti-torpedo net. Deploy it out at the distance discussed, but have it curve under the base/ship rather than simply hang down in the water. For such a net, it would need to be some sort of carbon fibre so it is lighter than steel.

Again, it would only be useful for a barrier defence of an immobile offshore base/floating fortress.

The best defence, though, is a counter-offensive one. Rather than simply accept that 'the torpedo will always get through', a multi-layered system of anti-torpedo torpedoes, supercavitating underwater rockets and other solutions could shift the paradigm.

Now, this is very unlikely in reality as

1.) There are no Floating Fortresses
2.) There are other means of defending aircraft carriers and large surface ships
3.) The technology of anti-torpedo torpedoes hasn't advanced as quickly as it might where there was a strong underwater threat