Question regarding the Montreux Convention

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Question regarding the Montreux Convention

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Question regarding the Montreux Convention

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Question regarding the Montreux Convention - 12/4/2015 4:17:50 PM

Vici Supreme

Posts: 558
Joined: 12/4/2013
From: Southern Germany
Status: offline

Question to those who know.

So I've read about the Montreux Convention this week, what it states exactly and so on. The restriction of military vessels which specifies that not more than a total (one or multiple) of 15.000 tons displacement of none-Black Sea state warships are allowed to transit the Bosphorus at once left me wondering how the USS Mount Whitney is allowed to transit the straits. I know that this limit can be stretched a little, as was the case in 2008, but the Mount Whitney overshoots the upper limit with her 18.400 tons by far. Most of you guys probably know that the Mount Whitney visits the Black Sea on a regular basis and publishments by the USN 6th Fleet always include "The U.S. Navy, on a normal and routine basis, operates ships in the Black Sea consistent with the Montreux Convention and International Law." when it comes to anything Black Sea related... I'm just wondering what's the deal here. Maybe you guys can point me out some special case here.

Cheers!

_____________________________

Post #: 1

RE: Question regarding the Montreux Convention - 12/4/2015 5:00:25 PM

NakedWeasel

Posts: 500
Joined: 1/14/2014
Status: offline

Meh. The Turks own the passage and can say who or what goes through, period. NATO backs their play. It's probably not more complicated than that.

_____________________________

Though surrounded by a great number of enemies
View them as a single foe
And so fight on!

(in reply to Vici Supreme)

Post #: 2

RE: Question regarding the Montreux Convention - 12/4/2015 5:06:06 PM

Vici Supreme

Posts: 558
Joined: 12/4/2013
From: Southern Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NakedWeasel

Meh. The Turks own the passage and can say who or what goes through, period. NATO backs their play. It's probably not more complicated than that.

Yes, the Turks are holding authority over the passage. I see your point, but in 2008 it was also Turkey who held back two US ships from entering the Black Sea because of regulations.

_____________________________

(in reply to NakedWeasel)

Post #: 3

RE: Question regarding the Montreux Convention - 12/4/2015 5:52:45 PM

gdir

Posts: 44
Joined: 11/11/2013
Status: offline

The Navy says that the USS Mount Whitney has a displacement of just 15,000 tons:

http://www.msc.navy.mil/inventory/ships.asp?ship=128

Wikipedia gives higher numbers.

(in reply to Vici Supreme)

Post #: 4

RE: Question regarding the Montreux Convention - 12/4/2015 7:19:05 PM

CCIP-subsim

Posts: 695
Joined: 11/10/2015
Status: offline

I think the devil's in the details - it says 18,400 under full load, and I suspect the treaty limit is not taken by the full load displacement.

(in reply to gdir)

Post #: 5

RE: Question regarding the Montreux Convention - 12/4/2015 8:34:13 PM

Vici Supreme

Posts: 558
Joined: 12/4/2013
From: Southern Germany
Status: offline

I'm surprised there is no special case for this ship. You guys are probably right. On the paper, she just fits through the Bosphorus.

_____________________________

(in reply to CCIP-subsim)

Post #: 6